MASTER 
NEGATIVE 

NO.  92-80771 


MICROFILMED  1993 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or 
other  reproductions  of  copyrighted  material. 

Under  certain  conditions  specified  In  the  law,  libraries  and 
archives  are  authorized  to  furnish  a  photocopy  or  other 
reproduction.  One  of  these  specified  conditions  Is  that  the 
photocopy  or  other  reproduction  Is  not  to  be  **used  for  any 
purpose  other  than  private  study,  scholarship,  or 
research."  If  a  user  makes  a  request  for,  or  later  uses,  a 
photocopy  or  reproduction  for  purposes  In  excess  of  "fair 
use,"  that  user  may  be  liable  for  copyright  Infringement. 

This  Institution  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to  accept  a 
copy  order  If,  In  Its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  Involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


ROGERS,  ELIZABETH 
FRANCES 


TITLE: 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  THE 
SACRAMENTAL  SYSTEM 


PLACE: 


ME\N  YORK 


DATE: 


1917 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MTCROFORM  TARCKT 


Master  Negative  # 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


r  •U-'if  •" 


•^^mmf^ 


il89L83 

Kogers,  Elizabeth  Frances,  1892- 

Peter  Lombard  and  the  sacramental  system  rbvi  EliVn 
beth  Frances  Rogers  ...    New  York,  1917  ^ 

4  p.  I.,  250  p,  1  1.    23'"'. 
Thesis  (I'll.  i).)--Columbia  university. 
I  Bibliography:  p.  247-250. 

L378.7C\V0  Another   copy. 
R63 

DZlfi.jij::^^  Uspv   ;.!  Eurgooo   Li 


d1c3jJ.03 


J^4(K>f 


l&>o"f  ?oYg?eT'^      {  "^J  Q^l^^^^  Library. 

•  jColiimbia  Univ.  Libr.         ^*-^ 


17-<y64 


--( 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 

FILM     SIZE:___lLr_:::                               REDUCTION     RATIO:         /  /  ^ 
IMAGE  PLACEMENT;    JA  Qj^    IB     IIB  

DATE     FILMED:__.     .__;:*' 3L-1>J*>INITIALS_____         -       ^Y 

FILMED  BY:    RESEARCTh  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODBRIDGE.  CT 


r 


Association  for  information  and  image  Management 

1 1 00  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1 1 00 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

i  301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

1         2         3 

nhmlimhmji^^ 


TTTT7 


Inches 


4         5         6 

iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiil 


TTT 


m 


7        8        9 

iliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliii 


10 


1 


T 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


11 


1^ 

2.8 
3.2 

m 

t  5  6 

m 

3.6 

4.0 


1.4 


I   I    I 


11        12       13       14 

iiIiiiiIiiiiIiihIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIi 


T 


M   I 


2.5 


2.2 


2.0 


.8 


1.6 


15    mm 

ill 


i 


MflNUFflCTURED   TO   flllM   STRNDfiRDS 
BY   fiPPLIED   IMAGE,     INC. 


# 


k' 

m 

•  j:.: 

^ 


igaaHBHi 


;-»^.;<' 


I  i    I  1  III  i  i  II  J  i  .J  I  I  Lii  J  I I  t  J   1  I    I.      J   I 

1  I 

THH  LIBRARIES 


m 


i 


f^ 


f^ 


COl UMBiA  UNIVERSITY 


f^ 


fU 


m 


n 


m 


i 

i 


fij 


f^ 


General  Library 


fa 


f^ 


fi 


m 


1  i 

fSTDTIfm^jBnlff^  B 

La»»"—Ml         I ^    ki iii^i    \  i    L— ■■—  -J    %  f    fci ■ Mi^    ^,.,^_^^     ^^.,^,_      ^v^B^^ 


C^H 


iiiiiijiiiiiiii! 


URl 


Si 


iiiiinini  •"■  ■ 


'-ijftt^ 


yfe 


'  '5 


=T 


flPV^ 


PETER  LOMBARD 

AND  THE 

SACRAMENTAL 
SYSTEM 


LIZAli.  JU  HIA.NOES  RUCERS,  M.A. 


NEW  YORK 
1917 


I 


V^^ViS^             w^ 

Columbia  IBnxbtx^xtp 

in  tl|t  £up  of  Btto  gork 

LIBRARY 

^ft 

IsJBwl 

^^^S:^ 

I  ' 


>! 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND 
THE  SACRAMENTAL 

SYSTEM 


ELIZABETH  FRANCES  ROGERS,  M.A, 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILLMENT 
OF    THE    REQUIREMENTS    FOR    THE 
DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY, 
IN   THE   FACULTY  OF   POLITICAL 
SCIENCE,     COLUMBIA     UNIVERSITY 


NEW  YORK 
1917 


\\ 


1    I 


>] 


I 


mm-^ 


Copyright,  1917,  by 
ELIZABETH  FRANCES  ROGERS 


>'l^ 


if 


> 


^\:^ 


ij 


if 


TO  MY  FATHER 

PROFESSOR  ROBERT  WILLIAM  ROGERS 


/ 


/ 


> 


CONTENTS 

CHAP.  ^^^^ 

Preface ^^* 

I.    The  Conception  of  Sacrament  in  the  Early  Fathers  i 

II.    The  Formulation  of  the  Definition  of  Sacrament.  .  25 

III.  The  Eucharistic  Controversy 3^ 

IV.  Efforts  After  Codification 39 

V.     Predecessors  of  the  Lombard 4^ 

VI.     Peter  Lombard  and  His  Text-Book 5^ 

Appendix 

Translation  of  Book  IV,  Distinctions  I-XXVI,  of 
THE  Quatuor  Libri  Sententiarum  of  Peter  the 

Lombard 79 

Bibliography  ^47 


i     k 


^A\ 


1    > 


r 


% 


•  I 


■  I 


PREFACE 

Erasmus  once  complained  that  there  were  as  many  commen- 
taries on  Peter  Lombard's  "Sentences"  as  there  were  theologians. 
But  here  is  a  commentary  by  one  who  is  not  even  a  theologian 
but  only  a  student  of  history.  It  is  fortunate  that  Erasmus — 
and  the  Lombard  himself— did  not  live  to  see  this  evil  day. 

This  is  not  work  which  would  have  won  the  coveted  degree 
of  "Bachalarius  Sententiarius"  in  a  medieval  university— I  can 
only  lay  claim  to  have  won  to  an  interest  in  the  subject  equal  to 
that  of  most  of  those  medieval  bachelors.  My  first  interest  in 
Medieval  Church  History  I  owe  to  my  college  professor,  Annie 
Heloise  Abel,  and  my  interest  in  this  particular  phase  of  it  to 
Seminars  on  the  Medieval  Church  with  Professor  Shotwell  at 
Columbia.  The  subject  was  assigned  to  me— I  should  never  have 
had  the  courage  to  venture  on  it  otherwise — and  as  I  finish  my 
study  of  it,  I  can  only  say  in  the  Lombard's  own  words,  "If  any- 
one can  explain  it  better,  I  am  not  envious." 

I  have  had  courtesies  in  many  libraries,  but  I  wish  especially 
to  speak  gratefully  of  the  Bodleian  Library  in  Oxford,  of  the 
Library  of  Columbia  University,  and  of  that  of  Union  Theolog- 
ical Seminary.  I  am  particularly  indebted  to  Professor  Rockwell 
of  Union  Seminary  for  his  invaluable  help  and  training  in  bibli- 
ography. 

I  wish  here  to  express  my  gratitude  to  Professor  Shotwell 
for  the  most  interesting  work  in  the  Social  History  of  the  Middle 
Ages;  to  Professor  Woker  of  the  University  of  Bern,  "ein  ge- 
borener  Lehrer,  der  glaubt  dass  jeder  Student  ein  Genie  ist,"  as  a 
colleague  said  of  him,  for  fascinating  lectures  on  the  Political 
History  of  medieval  times,  and  for  kindness  to  a  foreigner;  and 
to  Professor  Annie  Heloise  Abel,  now  of  Smith  College,  not  only 
for  inspiring  teaching  in  my  undergraduate  days,  but  for  con- 
stant interest,  friendship  and  encouragement  in  my  graduate 
study.  Elizabeth  F.  Rogers. 

Madison,  New  Jersey, 
January  2,  1917. 


■  -y^'-iu .r  ma 


> 


» 


CHAPTER  I 

The  Conception  of  Sacrament  in  the  Early  Fathers 
One  should  not  expect  to  find  a  definition  of  the  sacraments, 
much  less  a  developed  sacramental  system  in  the  writings  of  the 
early  Church.^  In  the  history  of  religion,  cult  frequently  develops 
before  dogma.  It  is  in  many  instances  a  determining  element  in 
the  formulation  of  doctrine,  even  where  the  doctrine,  on  the  face 
of  it,  seems  to  furnish  the  very  basis  for  the  cult.  In  the  Chris- 
tian Church  we  find  a  long  development  of  the  form  of  worship, 
and  the  beginnings  of  formal  liturgy,  before  we  come  to  any  dis- 
cussion of  the  meaning  of  these  ceremonies. 

It  is  controversy  which  brings  precision  in  people's  ideas. 
In  the  early  Church,  there  were  the  long  struggles  with  the  pagans, 
which  we  see  reflected  in  the  apologetic  literature  of  the  time,  and 
then  the  innumerable  controversies  over  the  heresies  which  arose 
in  the  Church  itself,  and  called  forth  the  formulation  of  the  ortho- 
dox  belief.  In  the  ^^Apologies"  against  the  pagans,  and  in  the 
^'Defences"  against  Christian  heretics,  we  may  look  for  the  be- 
ginnings of  that  long  and  slow  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
sacraments,  which  only  attained  its  final  form  more  than  a  thou- 
sand years  later  in  the  writings  of  the  Scholastic  theologians. 

To  trace  this  development  is  extremely  difficult  because  the 
idea  of  sacrament  matures  in  silence  while  other  subjects  are 
monopolizing  discussion.  The  earlier  Fathers  are  far  more  con- 
cerned with  the  great  doctrines  of  faith  than  with  the  sacraments. 
They  are  discussing  the  resurrection  of  the  Lord  and  its  bearing 
upon  the  resurrection  of  believers.    They  are  laboring  to  convince 


I  For  obvious  reasons  this  study  in  the  history  of  the  medieval  church  does 
not  go  into  the  problems  of  the  interpretation  of  New  Testament  texts  or  that 
of  the  conception  of  sacrament  held  in  the  apostolic  age;  for  such  considerations 
carry  one  into  quite  a  different  field,  that  of  New  Testament  exegesis  and  com- 
parative  religion. 


i. 


y 


2  PETER  LOMBARD 

unbelievers,  to  establish  the  wavering,  to  stimulate  love  and  good 
works.  It  is  among  the  multifarious  interests  of  the  church  that 
here  and  there  a  spark  is  struck  with  some  light  upon  the  sacra- 
ments. It  is,  however,  fascinatingly  interesting  to  see  how  the 
spark  kindles  larger  masses  of  material,  and  to  observe  the  grow- 
ing flame. 

It  has  seemed  well  worth  while  to  single  out  from  the  writ- 
ings which  are  so  multiform,  and  so  rich,  the  passages  which  relate 
to  the  sacraments,  and  to  set  them  down,  closely  following  a 
chronological  order.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  passages  quoted 
are  much  longer  in  the  earlier  than  in  the  later  writers.  The  rea- 
son is  that  the  earlier  Christians  give  only  hints,  suggestions,  allu- 
sions to  the  sacraments,  and  to  make  these  clear  we  must  have 
before  us  the  whole  of  the  context.  Later,  as  the  minds  of  men 
were  more  clearly  focussed  upon  the  sacraments,  and  definitions 
of  them  had  become  matter  of  controversy  the  citations  are  brief, 
specific  and  on  that  account  at  times  arid. 

JUSTIN  MARTYR  (c.   II4-C.   165) 

In  the  literature  of  Apology,  the  earliest  detailed  and  from 
many  points  of  view  the  most  interesting  reference  to  the  Chris- 
tian cult  is  that  of  Justin  Martyr,  who  died  A.  D.  165.  He  gives 
a  picture  of  the  worship,  including  a  description  of  its  central 
ceremony,  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  which  later  apologists 
did  not  dare  to  do  owing  to  the  persecutions  and  the  resultant 
Discipline  of  the  Secret.^  But  it  is  significant  of  the  general 
character  of  the  early  Christian  doctrine,  that  one  finds  in  the  long 
exposition  of  Justin  almost  no  light  upon  the  doctrines  involved. 
He  does  not  define  sacraments.  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  it  is 
true,  do  stand  out  very  clearly  as  essential  to  Christianity;  but 
there  is  an  equal  emphasis  upon  prayer.  This  does  not  mean  that 
Justin  lacked  the  conception  of  sacrament.     He  had  been  too 


*  The  obligation  to  keep  secret  from  the  pagans  and  the  unbaptized,  the 
formula  of  the  three-fold  name,  the  Creed,  and  the  Lord's  Prayer.  This  was  a 
following  of  the  pagan  mysteries,  and  is  akin  to  the  scruple  among  primitive 
peoples,  against  revealing  the  knowledge  of  a  powerful  name.     Cf.  Bonwetsch. 


> 


i 


\ 


i 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS  3 

familiar  with  the  Mysteries  for  that.    For,  although  he  does  not 

use  any  special  term  for  the  sacraments,  he  refers  to  their  effects 

in  language  which  implies  an  acquaintance  with  the  mystery  rites.^ 

We  can  see  an  instance  of  this  in  his  description  of  Baptism. 

*'I  will  also  relate  the  manner  in  which  we  dedicated  ourselves 
to  God  when  we  had  been  made  new  through  Christ.  ...  As  many 
as  are  persuaded  and  beUeve  that  what  we  teach  and  say  is  true,  and 
undertake  to  be  able  to  live  accordingly,  are  instructed  to  pray  and 
to  entreat  God  with  fasting,  for  the  remission  of  their  sins  that  are 
past,  we  praying  and  fasting  with  them.  Then  they  are  brought  by 
us  where  there  is  water,  and  are  regenerated  in  the  same  manner  in 
which  we  were  ourselves  regenerated.^  For,  in  the  name  of  God,  the 
Father  and  Lord  of  the  universe,  and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  then  receive  the  washing  with  water.^ 
.  .  And  this  washing  is  called  illumination,  because  they  who 
learn  these  things  are  illuminated  in  their  understandings.  .  .  .  "  * 
His  appreciation  of  the  analogy  to  the  mystery  rites  is  inter- 
esting, but  he  draws  no  doctrinal  conclusions  which  would  make 
clearer  the  kind  of  ceremony  employed. 

"And  the  devils,  indeed,  having  heard  this  washing  published 
by  the  prophet,  instigated  those  who  enter  their  temples,  and  are 
about  to  approach  them  with  libations  and  burnt-offerings,  also  to 
sprinkle  themselves ;  and  they  cause  them  also  to  wash  themselves 
entirely,  as  they  depart  [from  the  sacrifice],  before  they  enter  into 
the  shrines  in  which  images  are  set."^ 

1  It  is  not  hereby  implied  that  the  early  Christians  confused  sacraments  with 
mysteries.  They  regarded  these  rites  as  instituted  by  Christ  and  loathed  those 
of  the  heathen.  The  modem  view  that  mysteries  influenced  the  development  of 
sacraments  is  right,  but  the  Christians  of  A.  D.  150  were  ignorant  of  this. 

s'EiretTO  470Krai  u0'  r^Atwv  ivQa,  vSup  iari,  Kai  rpdirov  &vay€vvififf€U)S,  6p  Kal  TjfxeU 
avToi  dveyevvifidrjfiev,  dpayevvQvTai. 

*  First  Apology,  c.  LXI. 

*  Ibid.      KaXeiTat  6^  tovto  rb  \ovrp6v  <^wTt(r/u^s,  «s  (pbni^ofj^pwv  r^v  didvoiav  tQ>v 

toOto  fjLavdav6vTuv. 

This  word  "illumination"  or  "enlightenment"  is  borrowed  straight  from 
the  Greek  mysteries,  and  comes  to  be  the  constant  technical  term.  See  Hatch, 
The  Influence  of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages  upon  the  Christian  Church,  p.  295. 
Also  Hamack,  "History  of  Dogma,"  vol.  I,  pp.  207-8.  German  Edition,  vol.  I, 
pp.  229-230. 

6  Ibid.  c.  LXII. 


-    J\ 


4  PETER  LOMBARD 

To  Justin  we  are  indebted  for  the  first  description  of  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Eucharist  following  Baptism  in  the  early  Church. 
The  service  begins  with  prayers  for  the  illuminated  person  and 
for  the  others,  already  members  of  the  Christian  community. 

''Having  ended  the  prayers,  we  salute  one  another  with  a  kiss. 
There  is  then  brought  to  the  president  of  the  brethren  bread  and  a 
cup  of  wine  mixed  with  water;  and  he  taking  them,  gives  praise 
and  glory  to  the  Father  of  the  universe,  through  the  name  of  the 
Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  offers  thanks  at  considerable  length 
for  our  being  counted  worthy  to  receive  these  things  at  his  hands. 
And  when  he  has  concluded  the  prayers  and  thanksgivings,  all  the 
people  express  their  assent  by  saying  Amen.  .  .  .  And  when  the 
president  has  given  thanks,  and  all  the  people  have  expressed  their 
assent,  those  who  are  called  by  us  deacons  give  to  each  of  those  pres- 
ent to  partake  of  the  bread  and  wine  mixed  with  water  over  which 
the  thanksgiving  was  pronounced,  and  to  those  who  are  absent  they 
carry  away  a  portion.^ 

"And  this  food  is  called  among  us  Evxagiaria  [the  Eucharist], 
of  which  no  one  is  allowed  to  partake  but  the  man  who  believes  that 
the  things  which  we  teach  are  true,  and  who  has  been  washed  with 
the  washing  that  is  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  unto  regeneration, 
and  who  is  so  Hving  as  Christ  has  enjoined.  For  not  as  common 
bread  and  common  drink  do  we  receive  these;  but  in  like  manner 
as  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  having  been  made  flesh  by  the  Word 
of  God,  had  both  flesh  and  blood  for  our  salvation,  so  likewise  have 
we  been  taught  that  the  food  which  is  blessed  by  the  prayer  of  his 
word,  and  from  which  our  blood  and  flesh  by  transmutation  are  nour- 
ished, is  the  flesh  and  blood  of  that  Jesus  who  was  made  flesh."  ^  .  .  . 

Here  again  he  sees  the  resemblance  to  the  sacred  meals  of  the 
mysteries. 

"Which  the  wicked  devils  have  imitated  in  the  mysteries  of 


» Ibid.  c.  LXV. 

Called  the  Eulogia— it  was  also  sent  by  the  bishops,  notably  those  of  Rome, 
to  their  daughter  churches,  and  to  foreign  bishops  and  churches,  as  a  symbol  of 
Christian  love  and  brotherhood.  The  practice  seems  to  have  been  universal, 
but  tended  to  degenerate  into  irreverence  and  superstition,  and  was  forbidden 
by  the  Council  of  Laodicaea,  A.  D.  365. 

*  Ibid.  C.  LXVI.  .  .  .  Ou  -ydip  w$  KOivbv  ifnovovU  Koivi>vir6tM  ravra  \an^v0fuv.  .  .  . 


1/ 


V 


> 


> 


\ 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS  5 

Mithras,  commanding  the  same  thing  to  be  done.  For,  that  bread 
and  a  cup  of  water  are  placed  with  certain  incantations  in  the  mystic 
rites  of  one  who  is  being  initiated,  you  either  know  or  can  learn."  ^ 
Upon  the  whole,  then,  the  earliest  detailed  description  of  the 
Christian  worship  which  comes  to  us  from  the  sub-apostolic  age, 
shows  the  existence  and  appreciation  of  sacramental  religion. 

According  to  Justin  the  Christian  form  of  worship  is  a  mys- 
tery in  the  sense  of  the  mysteries  of  Mithras  or  Eleusis.  That  is, 
its  rites  themselves  convey  the  grace  of  God.  In  baptism,  one  is 
"illuminated,"  and  in  the  Eucharist  one  does  not  receive  "com- 
mon bread  and  common  drink"  but  a  miraculous  and  divine  nour- 
ishment. Justin  does  not  elaborate  the  exact  operation  of  the 
divine  grace  in  either  case,  but  the  general  sense  is  clear.  The  full 
force  of  his  description  can  be  seen  only  when  one  has  in  mind  the 
other  mysteries,  which  he  was  combatting,  but  which  none  the  less 
furnished  the  mould  of  his  thought. 

From  the  description  which  Justin  offers  it  is  clear  that  this 
sense  of  the  sacramental  in  the  Christian  religion  was  not  simply 
that  of  an  author  who  had  himself  been  saturated  in  the  pagan 
atmosphere,  but  was  also  the  outlook  of  the  Christians  in  the  com- 
munities he  describes.  For  instance,  the  attitude  of  the  congrega- 
tion toward  the  "blessed  bread,"  which  is  sent  to  the  absent  as  well 
as  partaken  of  by  those  present,  indicates  a  feeling  for  the  sacra- 
mental grace  imparted  through  the  elements. 

Although  therefore  there  is  no  definite  conception  of  sacra- 
ment as  a  whole  and  no  definition  of  its  working,  the  implications 
from  this  description  are  clear  enough.  The  cult  is  sacramental, 
even  when  viewed  from  the  angle  of  one  trained  as  a  pagan. 

iREN.t:us  ( c.   190) 

The  next  important  text  to  which  we  turn  is  naturally  that 
of  Iren^us,  Bishop  of  Lyons  in  France,  in  the  last  quarter  of  the 
second  century.  He  is  the  first  of  the  Fathers  to  review  in  a 
comprehensive  way  the  heretical  doctrines  into  which  Christianity 


1  Ibid.  c.  LXVI. 


t 


r- 


1 


6  PETER  LOMBARD 

seemed  to  be  dissolving,  and  to  state  the  case  of  orthodoxy  with 
incisive  vigor.  His  famous  work  "Against  Heresies,"  or  **A 
Refutation  and  Subversion  of  Knowledge  falsely  so  called,"  not 
only  summarizes  the  chief  heresies  which  were  then  threatening 
the  speculative  Christian  world,  but  also,  by  way  of  refutation,  a 
somewhat  elaborate  statement  of  the  bases  of  the  Catholic  teach- 
ing. So  that  Irenaeus  stands  as  a  prime  source  for  the  early  his- 
tory of  Catholicism. 

It  is  therefore  significant  that  when  one  turns  to  this  state- 
ment of  Christian  teaching  and  practice,  one  finds  no  developed 
statement  of  the  working  of  the  sacraments.  Such  references  as 
there  are,  are  incidental  and  their  meaning  is  to  be  appreciated 
mainly  by  a  study  of  the  context. 

It  is  as  sacrifice  rather  than  as  sacrament  in  the  technical  sense 
of  this  word,  that  Irenaeus  develops  his  discussion  of  the  Euchar- 
ist.^ This  is,  of  course,  an  aspect  of  the  Eucharist  which  is  almost 
as  important  as  that  of  sacrament  and  runs  parallel  to  it  through- 
out all  its  history.  The  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  is  the  setting  for  the 
sacrament  of  the  Eucharist.  The  problem  of  transubstantiation, 
that  supreme  problem  of  medieval  and  modern  controversy,  has 
its  roots  in  the  conceptions  of  sacrifice  as  well  as  in  those  of  sacra- 
ment. The  controversies  as  to  the  working  of  the  sacrament,  as 
to  whether  the  priest  at  the  altar  repeats  the  real  sacrifice  of  Christ 
or  not — these  and  many  other  related  dogmas  carry  one  over 
rather  to  the  field  of  sacrifice  than  to  that  of  sacramental  com- 
munion. So  that  the  discussions  of  the  early  Fathers  concerning 
the  Christian  sacrifice  help,  as  well,  to  lay  the  basis  for  a  definition 
of  sacrament.  But  they  do  little  more.  For  they  naturally  link 
up  with  the  priesthood  and  temple  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
attempt  either  to  draw  from  the  "law  and  the  prophets"  sugges- 


» The  Western  Church  came,  in  time,  to  apply  the  term  sacrifice  almost 
exclusively  to  the  one  "sacrifice  of  the  altar,"  the  Mass;  by  which  they  meant 
the  total  ceremony  of  which  the  eucharistic  communion  or  sacrament  was  only  a 
part.  But  the  conception  of  sacrifice  in  Christian  worship  naturally  transcends 
these  technical  boundaries.  It  is,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  a  wider  term  than 
sacrament. 


\ 


V 


') 


»♦" 


( 


l! 


( 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS  7 

tions  for  the  conduct  of  the  Christian  community,^  or  to  show 
the  essential  justification  for  Christian  practices  as  a  modifica- 
tion of  the  rites  of  the  old  dispensation. 

Sacrifices  and  oblations  are  required  of  the  Christian  as  they 
had  been  of  the  Jew.  "The  class  of  oblations  in  general  has  not 
been  set  aside;  for  there  were  both  oblations  there  [among  the 
Jews],  and  there  are  oblations  here  [among  the  Christians]. 
Sacrifices  there  were  among  the  people ;  sacrifices  there  are,  too, 
in  the  Church :  but  the  kind  has  been  changed,  inasmuch  as  the 
offering  is  now  made,  not  by  slaves,  but  by  freemen."^ 

In  his  discussion  of  the  working  of  this  Christian  sacrifice, 
Irenseus  comes  very  near  a  definition  of  sacrament  in  the  passage 
in  which  he  defends  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body. 
The  Eucharist  is  a  medium  of  divine  grace  since  the  body  that  is 
nourished  with  it  does  not  go  to  corruption  but  is  to  partake  of 
eternal  life.  The  conception  of  sacrament  is  implied  if  not 
directly  expressed. 

"How  can  they  say  that  the  flesh,  which  is  nourished  with  the 
body  of  the  Lord  and  with  his  blood,  goes  to  corruption,  and  does 
not  partake  of  life?  Let  them,  therefore,  either  alter  their  opinion, 
or  cease  from  offering  the  things  just  mentioned.  But  our  opinion  is 
in  accordance  with  the  Eucharist,  and  the  Eucharist  in  turn  estab- 
lishes our  opinion.  For  we  offer  to  him  his  own,  announcing  con- 
sistently the  fellowship  and  union  of  the  flesh  and  Spirit.  For  as  the 
bread,  which  is  produced  from  the  earth,  when  it  receives  the  invo- 
cation of  God,  is  no  longer  common  bread,  but  the  Eucharist,  con- 
sisting of  two  realities,  earthly  and  heavenly^;  so  also  our  bodies, 
when  they  receive  the  Eucharist,  are  no  longer  corruptible,  having 
the  hope  of  the  resurrection  to  eternity."  ^ 

1  As  in  Clement's  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

2  Contra  Haereses.  iv.  XVIII.  2. 

Et  non  genus  oblationum  reprobatum  est;  oblationes  enim  et  iUic,  obla- 
tionesautem  et  hie:  sacrificia  inpopulo,  sacrificia  inEcclesia:  sed  species  immu- 
tata  est  tantum,  quippe  cum  jam  non  a  servis,  sed  a  libris  offeratur. 

3  Ibid.  iv.  XVIII.  5.  .  .  'fis  .  .  .  o.irb  yijs  dpros  irpoaXafxftavdfUvos  r^v  iKKKriCLv 
rov  e&)\},  olfK^Ti  Koivbs  ApTos  iarlv,  dW  ivxapiarla,  iK  dOo  irpayfMiTwv  avvwriiKvia,  iiriyeLov 
T€  KoX  ovpavlov, 

<  Ibid.  iv.  XVIII.  5. 


8 


PETER  LOMBARD 


More  specific  reference  to  the  sacramental  element  in  the 
Christian  sacrifice  occurs  in  another  passage  deahng  with  the  same 
theme.  Defending  his  doctrine  of  the  "salvation  of  the  flesh,"  ^ 
Irenseus  argues: 

**But  if  this  indeed  do  not  attain  salvation,  then  neither  did  the 
Lord  redeem  us  with  his  blood,  nor  is  the  cup  of  the  Eucharist  the 
communion  of  his  blood,  nor  the  bread  which  we  break  the  com- 
munion of  his  body.  .  .  .  And  as  we  are  his  members,  we  are  also 
nourished  by  means  of  the  creation  (and  he  himself  grants  the  crea- 
tion to  us,  for  he  causes  his  sun  to  rise,  and  sends  rain  when  he 
wills).  He  has  acknowledged  the  cup  (which  is  a  part  of  the  crea- 
tion) as  his  own  blood,  from  which  he  bedews  our  blood;  and  the 
bread  (also  a  part  of  the  creation)  he  has  established  as  his  own 
body,  from  which  he  gives  increase  to  our  bodies. i 

**When,  therefore,  the  mingled  cup  and  the  manufactured  bread 
receives  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  Eucharist  becomes  the  body 
of  Christ,2  from  which  things  our  flesh  is  increased  and  supported, 
how  can  they  affirm  that  the  flesh  is  incapable  of  receiving  the  gift 
of  God,  which  is  life  eternal,  which  [flesh]  is  nourished  from  the 
body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  and  is  a  member  of  him?"  ^ 

In  these  scattered  references  to  the  Eucharist,  incidental  to 
his  discussion  of  the  Resurrection,  we  can  see  the  line  of  thought 
pursued  by  Irenseus  concerning  that  element  of  the  sacrifice  which 
is  also  sacrament,  namely  the  nature  of  the  communion.  It  is 
clear  that  although  there  is  no  definition  of  sacrament,  and  that 
the  conception  is  so  embedded  in  that  of  sacrifice  as  to  be  practi- 
cally obscured  from  view,  the  sacrament  is  there  as  genuinely  as 
though  it  had  been  defined  in  detail. 

There  is  only  one  passage  which  at  all  gives  Iren^us'  view 
of  baptism: 

"It  was  not  for  nothing  that  Naaman  of  old,  when  suffering 
from  leprosy,  was  purified  upon  his  being  baptized,  but  [it  served] 

1  Ibid.  V.  11.  2. 

2  Ibid.  V.  II.  3.     t6  K€KpafiAvov  TTOTifiptov,  Kal  6  yeyovws  dpTOi  ixid^x^rai  r6v  \6yov 
Tov  deov,  Kal  ylptrai  ij  eixapuxrla  aQpui  XpurroO 

»  Ibid.  V.  II.  3. 


/ 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS  9 

as  an  indication  to  us.  For  as  we  are  lepers  in  sin,  we  are  made 
clean,  by  means  of  the  sacred  water  and  the  invocation  of  the  Lord, 
from  our  old  transgressions;  being  spiritually  regenerated  as  new- 
born babes,  even  as  the  Lord  has  declared :  'Except  a  man  be  born 
again  through  water  and  the  Spirit,  he  shall  not  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.'  "  1 

We  are  now  come  to  the  end  of  our  review  of  the  contribu- 
tions of  Irenaeus  to  the  sacramental  svstem,  and  there  needs  onlv 
to  point  to  the  diflference  between  him  and  his  forerunner  Justin 
Martyr.  The  contrast  between  the  two  men  is  a  contrast  of  back- 
ground. The  analogies  which  Justin  finds  are  to  the  "sacred 
meals  of  the  mysteries,"  to  "the  mysteries  of  Mithras,"  to  "mys- 
tic rites,"  and  his  language  is  full  of  allusions  to  "sacred  meals," 
to  the  "initiated"  or  to  "incantations."  The  background  is  unmis- 
takably Greek.  This  is  significant  and  it  could  not  be  without 
influence  upon  the  man's  whole  thinking  and  upon  its  outcome  in 
dogma.  To  all  this  Irenaeus  presents  a  vivid  contrast.  His  dis- 
cussion is  freighted  with  the  imagery,  the  phraseology,  and  the 
theological  conceptions  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  the  "law  and 
the  prophets,"  "the  sacrifices"  of  the  Jewish  dispensation,  "the 
lepers," — all  of  them  and  many  more  from  this  single  source,  and 
the  analogies  and  illustrations  are  of  the  same  mould.  With  Ire- 
naeus it  is  not  Mithras  but  Naaman,  who  points  his  moral.  Herein 
lies  the  explanation  of  many  of  the  difTerences  in  the  conclusions 
of  the  two  men.  As  we  go  forward  now  to  Latin  instead  of  Greek 
we  shall  do  well  to  bear  in  mind  the  difTerences  between  Justin 
and  Irenaeus,  the  while  that  we  carry  forward  the  results  of  their 
thinking  and  disputing  upon  the  sacramental  system. 

TERTULLIAN    (c.    I50  Or   l6o-220  Or  240) 

The  Latin  tongue  is  singularly  lacking  in  the  terminology 
either  of  philosophy  or  of  religion,  a  characteristic  which  corre- 
sponds, so  it  has  often  been  claimed,  With  the  temper  of  the  Roman 
people  as  exhibited  in  their  history.  When  the  first  Latin  Father, 
Tertullian,  at  the  opening  of  the  third  century  attempted  to  frame 

»  Fragments.  XXXIV. 


lO 


PETER  LOMBARD 


the  conceptions  of  Christian  theology  in  Latin  he  was  unable  to 
translate  the  Greek  literally  since  the  languages  had  no  exact  par- 
allels, and  so  he  boldly  adapted  terms,  which  were  formerly  used 
in  a  different  connection,  to  the  uses  of  Christian  theology.  In 
the  legal  Latin  familiar  to  a  man  trained,  as  Tertullian  was,  in 
the  Roman  law,  the  word  sacramentum  had  several  different 
meanings.  In  the  first  place  it  meant  the  sum  which  the  two 
parties  to  a  suit  deposited— so-called  perhaps  because  it  was 
deposited  in  a  sacred  place.  ^  Then,  by  metonymy,  it  meant  a  civil 
suit  or  process.  Finally,  it  was  the  military  oath  of  allegiance, 
and  so  any  solemn  obligation. 

Tertullian  uses  this  term  in  various  ways.^  In  the  first  place 
we  have  the  literal  application  of  it  as  he  draws  a  parallel  be- 
tween the  neophyte's  promises  on  entering  the  Church  by  baptism 
and  the  soldier's  oath  of  allegiance.  The  Christian,  like  the  sol- 
dier, must  be  faithful  and  obedient  even  to  death,  for  "Who 
wished  this  fatal  issue  to  his  soldier,  but  he  who  sealed  him  by 
such  an  oath?"^  The  military  life,  then,  is  incompatible  with 
that  of  the  Christian,  for  ''there  is  no  agreement  between  the 
divine  and  the  human  sacrament."  ^ 

In  the  second  place,  Tertullian  chooses  sacramentum  as  a 
parallel  to  the  Greek  theological  term  iivotijqioi^  a  mystery  or 
secret  doctrine.  In  the  New  Testament  it  means  a  divine  secret, 
something  above  human  intelligence.*'^     Tertullian  uses  it  in  this 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


II 


*0r  perhaps  so-called  because  the  money  deposited  by  the  losing  party 
was  used  for  religious  purposes,  especially  for  the  sacra  publica  (divine  worship). 

*See  also  R6ville,  Albert,  Du  sens  du  mot  "sacramentum"  dans  Tertullien. 
Paris— Ecole  pratique  des  hautes  Etudes— Section  des  Sciences  religieuses. 
Etudes  de  critique  et  d'histoire.  v.  I.  pp.  195-204. 

■  Scorp.  4.  Quis  hunc  militi  suo  exitum  voluit,  nisi  qui  tali  eum  sacramento 
consignavit. 

*  De  Idol.  19.    Non  convenit  sacramento  divino  et  humano. 

This  tract  of  Tertullian 's,  as  also  the  De  Spectaculis,  affords  an  interesting 
glance  into  the  author's  mind.  No  less  than  his  hatred  of  heathen  religion  is  his 
hatred  of  heathen  art  and  culture.  The  teaching  of  literature  he  thinks  incom- 
patible with  the  Christian  profession,  and  to  him  the  well-spring  and  stimulus  of 
Art  is  lust. 

•Matt.  13,  II. 


i' 


I 


,1 


N 


i 


sense  when  he  speaks  of  a  sister  who  "converses  with  angels 
and  sometimes  even  with  the  Lord;  she  both  sees  and  hears 
mysterious  communications ^  ^  In  another  place  he  speaks  of 
fasting  as  an  aid  to  this  "recognition  of  mysterious  communica- 
tions." ^ 

In  addition  to  these  two  uses  of  the  word,  however,  Ter- 
tullian seems  as  well  to  use  "sacrament"  in  the  sense  to  which  we 
are  accustomed,  for  he  speaks  of  the  "sacrament .of  baptism"^ 
and  of  the  "sacrament  of  the  Eucharist." 

Of  the  Eucharist  he  gives  only  a  short  description : 

''We  take  also,  in  congregations  before  day-break,  and  from 
the  hand  of  none  but  the  presidents,^  the  sacraments  of  the  Euchar- 
ist, which  the  Lord  hath  commanded  to  be  eaten  at  meal-times,  and 
enjoined  to  be  taken  by  all  alike."  ^ 

From  Tertullian  there  seems  much  less  to  be  learned  con- 
cerning the  Eucharist  than  of  Baptism.  There  is  discernible  a 
growing  reverence  concerning  the  elements,  witnessed,  for  ex- 
ample, by  the  scrupulous  care  to  prevent  even  a  drop  or  a  crumb 
from  falling  to  the  ground.^     Beside  this  it  should,  perhaps,  be 


1  De  Anima.  9.  Conversatur  cum  angelis,  aliquando  etiam  cum  Domino, 
et  videt  et  audit  sacramenta. 

2  De  Jejuniis.  7.  Verum  etiam  sacramentorum  agnitionem  jejunia  de  Deo 
merebuntur. 

It  might  be  queried  why  Tertullian  chose  sacramentum.  to  translate  fwcr-^piov. 
It  would  seem  that  the  parallel  word  in  Latin,  taken  directly  from  the  Greek, 
mysterium,  could  have  been  better  used— its  meanings  and  uses  were  the  same. 
In  the  next  century  Ambrose  used  it  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  (Comment,  in  I  Cor. 
II,  27— Mysterium  celebrat.)  In  the  plural,  the  Latin,  as  the  Greek,  meant  the 
pagan  "mysteries,"  but  the  singular  had  the  more  general  meaning. 

There  was  also  the  Latinized  Greek  word  symbolum,  which  might  have  been 
used.  In  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  symbolum  was  used  of  the  formula  of 
baptism:  the  "symbol  of  the  Trinity"  [Ep.  Firmil.  ad  Cypr.  11];  the  "symbol  in 
which  we  baptize"  [Ep.  S.  Cypriani  ad  Magnum  7— Eodem  Symbolo  quo  et 
nos  baptizarej.  This  formula  grew  into  the  Roman  Creed,  and  Rufinus,  c. 
400,  called  it  the  "symbol  of  the  apostles."  [Comment,  in  Symbolum  Apostolo- 
rum.] 

^  De  Bapt.  9.    In  baptismi  sacramento. 

*  Nee  de  aliorum  manu  quam  praesidentium. 

*  De  Corona.  3. 


12 


PETER  LOMBARD 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


13 


noted  that  in  Tertiillian's  day  another  evidence  of  growing  rever- 
ence for  the  elements  is  to  be  discerned.  In  the  passage  just 
quoted  it  is  provided  that  these  are  to  be  received  "from  the  hand 
of  none  but  the  presidents/'  whereas  in  the  time  of  Justin  the 
elements  were  blessed  by  the  president  and  then  by  him  delivered 
to  the  deacons  who,  in  their  turn,  passed  them  on  to  the  faithful. 
They  are  now,  in  other  words,  to  pass  direct  from  the  president, 
and  are  thus  less  likely  to  fall  or  suffer  any  other  accident.  The 
ritual  develops  to  such  a  point  the  prohibitions  attached  to  the 
sacramental  act  as  to  indicate  a  distinct  growth  in  consciousness 
of  its  importance.  Yet  when  Tertullian  develops  his  doctrine  in 
words  carefully  weighed  there  is  no  sign  of  excessive  reverence, 
much  less  of  superstition.  Thus  he  speaks  of  the  bread  as  the 
figure  of  his  body,^  and  as  representing  his  body.^ 

To  baptism,  however,  Tertullian  devotes  an  entire  treatise, 
which  also  gives  us  much  of  his  general  conception  of  sacraments. 

"All  waters,  therefore,  ...  do,  after  invocation  of  God, 
attain  the  sacramental  power  of  sanctification ;  for  the  Spirit  imme- 
diately supervenes  from  the  heavens,  and  rests  over  the  waters,  sanc- 
tifying them  from  himself,  and  being  thus  sanctified,  they  imbibe 
at  the  same  time  the  power  of  sanctifying."  ^ 

"It  is  not  to  be  doubted  that  God  has  made  the  material  sub- 
stance which  he  has  disposed  throughout  all  his  products  and  works, 
obeying  him  also  in  his  own  peculiar  sacraments ;  that  the  material 
substance  which  governs  terrestrial  life  acts  as  agent  likewise  in  the 
celestial.    .    .    /'  ^ 

In  the  water  "we  are  cleansed  and  prepared  for  the  Holy 
Spirit." 

"Thus,  too,  does  the  angel,  the  witness  of  baptism,  'make  the 


*  Figura  corporis.  Adv.  Marcion.  III.  19. 

*  Panem  quo  ipsum  corpus  suum  representat.    Ibid.  I.  14. 

^  De  Bapt.  3.  Licet  eo  plenius  docerem  non  esse  dubitandum,  si  materiam, 
quam  in  omnibus  rebus  et  operibus  suis  Deus  disposuit,  etiam  in  sacramentis 
propriis  parere  fecit;  si  quae  vitam  terrenam  gubemat,  et  in  coelesti  procurat. 

*  De  Bapt.  4.  Ita  de  Sancto  sanctificata  natura  aquarum,  et  ipsa  sanctifi- 
care  concepit. 


paths  straight'  for  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  about  to  come  upon  us, 
by  the  washing  away  of  sins,  which  faith,  sealed  in  (the  name  of) 
the  Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  obtains.  .  .  .  More- 
over, after  the  pledging  both  of  the  attestation  of  faith  and  the 
promise  of  salvation  under  'three  witnesses,'  there  is  added,  of 
necessity,  mention  of  the  Church;  inasrquch  as,  wherever  there  are 
three,  (that  is,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,)  there  is 
the  Church,  which  is  a  body  of  three.^  .  .  .  After  this,  when  we 
have  issued  from  the  font,  we  are  thoroughly  anointed  with  a  blessed 
unction.  .  .  .  The  unction  runs  carnally,  (i.e.,  on  the  body,) 
but  profits  spiritually;  in  the  same  way  as  the  act  of  baptism  itself 
too  is  carnal,  in  that  we  are  plunged  into  water,  but  the  effect 
spiritual,  in  that  we  are  freed  from  sins.^    .    .     . 

"In  the  next  place  the  hand  is  laid  on  us,  invoking  and  inviting 
the  Holy  Spirit  through  benediction."  ^ 

Clause  after  clause  of  these  passages  show  Tertullian's 
appreciation  of  the  sacramental  principle.  "All  waters,  .  .  . 
after  invocation  of  God  attain  the  sacramental  power  of  sancti- 
fication." The  waters  are  sanctified  by  the  Spirit  and  at  the  same 
time  imbibe  the  power  of  sanctifying  those  who  shall  be  baptized 
in  them.^  He  emphasizes  the  distinction  between  the  simple  cere- 
mony of  baptism,  and  its  spiritual  significance.  "The  act  of  bap- 
tism itself  ...  is  carnal,  in  that  we  are  plunged  into  water, 
but  the  effect  spiritual,  in  that  we  are  freed  from  sins.  .  .  ."  ^ 
So  Tertullian  not  only  gives  the  word  sacrament  but  even,  when 
one  analyzes  closely  the  thought  in  this  extract,  we  see  in  it  a  fore- 
shadowing of  the  real  definition.  A  part  of  his  great  work  in  this 
line  we  shall  see  influenced  Cyprian  to  a  marked  degree,  and  espe- 
cially Cyprian's  uses  of  the  word  sacramentum. 

CYPRIAN  (200-258)^ 
Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage  in  the  middle  of  the  third  cen-^ 


1  De  Bapt.  6. 

2  De  Bapt.  7.     Quomodo  et  ipsius  baptismi  carnalis  actus,  quod  in  aqua 
mergimur;  spin  talis  effectus,  quod  delictis  liberamur. 

3  De  Bapt.  8.  <  De  Bapt.  4.  ^  De  Bapt.  7. 

•  See  also,  Edward  White  Benson,  Cyprian,  his  Life,  his  Times,  his  Work. 
London,  1897,  especially  pp.  331,  ff. 


< 


PETER  LOMBARD 


< 


tury,  puts  a  personal  stamp  on  his  work,  but  borrows  much  from 
Tertullian,  whose  tractates  he  read  assiduously.^  "Cyprian  did 
little  more  in  literature  than  to  adapt  the  style  of  Tertullian. 
.  .  .  Intellectually  Tertullian  was  an  originator,  Cyprian  a 
populariser."  Nearly  all  his  uses  of  the  word  sacrament  can  be 
paralleled  in  Tertullian.  The  bent  of  his  mind  was  more  practical 
than  speculative,  and  so  it  is  not  surprising  that  he  used  words 
only  in  the  signification  that  usage  had  already  given  them.^  In 
this,  he  is  in  marked  contrast  to  Tertullian,  with  his  bold  adapta- 
tion of  terms. 

It  is  interesting  therefore  to  see  that  this  first  great  student 
of  Tertullian  does  not  fasten  upon  any  one  of  the  various  sig- 
nifications attached  to  the  term  sacrament  by  Tertullian,  but  uses 
it  in  a  broad,  often  extremely  vague  sense,  to  convey  the  general 
sense  of  what  we  to-day  mean  by  sacrament.  The  unity  of  the 
Church  is  a  sacrament,*^  and  anyone  who  departs  from  the  one 
church  impugns  "the  sacrament  of  the  divine  tradition."  "*  In 
his  treatise  on  the  Lord's  prayer,  he  says,  "But  to  us,  beloved 
brethren,  besides  the  hours  of  prayer  observed  of  old,  both  the 
times  and  sacraments  of  praying  have  now  increased."  ^ 

As  in  Tertullian,  sacramentum  is  used  as  the  equivalent  of 
.fivarriQiov :  a  prophetic  figure.  The  giving  of  the  manna  in  the 
Exodus  is  a  sacrament  of  the  equality  with  which  "Christ  the  sun 
and  true  day  in  his  church"  gives  the  light  of  eternal  life.**  "Also 
in  the  priest  Melchizedek  we  see  prefigured  the  sacrament  of  the 


*  "At  Concordia  in  Italy,  I  saw  an  old  man  named  Paulus.  He  said  that 
in  his  youth  he  had  met  with  an  aged  secretary  of  the  blessed  Cyprian,  who  told 
him  that  Cyprian  never  passed  a  day  without  reading  some  portion  of  Tertul- 
lian's  works,  and  used  frequently  to  say,  *Da  magistrum,'  'Give  me  my  master,* 
meaning  Tertullian."    Jerome.  Catal.  c.  3.  cf.  Jerome,  Ep.  41. 

*J.  B.  Poukens,  Sacramentum  dans  les  oeuvres  de  saint  Cyprien.  Etude 
lexicographique.  Bulletin  d'ancienne  litterature  et  d'arch^ologie  chr^tiennes. 
Oct.  191 2. 

3  Ep.  ad  Pompeium  contra  Ep.  Stephani.  XI. 

4  Ibid.  XI. 

*  Lib.  de  Oratione  Dominica.  XXXV. 

*  Ep.  LXVIII.  14. 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


15 


V 


Y 


I 


'J 


sacrifice  of  the  Lord,^  according  to  what  divine  Scripture  testifies, 
and  says, 

'And  Melchizedek,  King  of  Salem,  brought  forth  bread  and  wine.' 
.  .  .  For  who  is  more  a  priest  of  the  most  high  God  than  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  offered  a  sacrifice  to  God  the  Father,  and  offered 
that  very  same  thing  which  Melchizedek  had  offered,  that  is,  bread 
and  wine,  to  wit,  his  body  and  blood  ?"  2 

He  sees  another  prophetic  figure  in  Noah's  ark. 

"Moreover,  Peter  himself,  showing  and  vindicating  the  unity, 
has  commanded  and  warned  us  that  we  cannot  be  saved,  except  by 
the  one  only  baptism  of  one  Church.  Tn  the  ark,'  says  he,  'of  Noah, 
few,  that  is,  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water,  as  also  baptism  shall 
in  like  manner  save  you.'  In  how  short  and  spiritual  a  summary 
has  he  set  forth  the  sacrament  of  unity!  For  as,  in  that  baptism 
of  the  world  in  which  its  ancient  iniquity  was  purged  away,  he 
who  was  not  in  the  ark  of  Noah  could  not  be  saved  by  water,  so 
neither  can  he  appear  to  be  saved  by  baptism  who  has  not  been  bap- 
tized in  the  Church  which  is  established  in  the  unity  of  the  Lord 
according  to  the  sacrament  of  the  one  ark."  ^ 

Moses,  to  bring  victory  to  the  Israelites  in  battle,  has  his  arms 
outstretched  "in  the  sign  and  sacrament  of  the  cross."  *  Here, 
sacrament  is  not  so  much  a  prophetic  figure  as  it  is  a  symbol.^ 

The  classical  meaning  of  sacrament  as  a  military  oath  is  still 
found  in  the  writings  of  Cyprian.  In  his  attack  on  those  who 
would  accept  the  baptism  given  among  heretics  he  says : 

"If  glory  is  thus  given  to  God,  if  the  fear  and  the  discipline  of 
God  is  thus  preserved  by  his  worshippers  and  his  priests,  let  us  cast 
away  our  arms ;  let  us  give  ourselves  up  to  captivity ;    ...    let  the 


1  Notice  the  phrase  "sacrament  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord."  An  idea  some- 
what similar  has  already  been  above  in  the  discussion  of  Irenaeus'  views  of  the 
sacrament  as  a  sacrifice.    See  above,  p.  22  ff. 

2  Ep.  LXIII.  4. 
»Ep.  LXXIV.  II. 

*  Ad  Fortunatum,  8. 

*  Poukens  Sacramentum  dans  les  oeuvres  de  saint  Cyprien. 


i6 


PETER  LOMBARD 


< 


y 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


17 


sacraments  of  the  divine  warfare  be  loosed ;  let  the  standards  of  the 
heavenly  camp  be  betrayed    .    .    . "  ^ 

We  have  stated  above  that  cult,  i.e.,  religious  practice,  often 
determines  dogma.  In  Cyprian's  case  a  situation  developed  which 
put  great  emphasis  upon  the  validity  of  that  sacrament  which  Ter- 
tullian  had  most  clearly  defined — Baptism.  There  is  much  discus- 
sion of  baptism,  because  of  the  two  difficult  questions  of  the  valid- 
ity of  the  baptism  of  heretics,  and  of  the  re-baptism  of  those  who, 
having  lapsed  during  the  severe  Decian  persecutions,  were  after- 
wards repentant  and  wished  to  return  to  the  church. 

True  baptism  is  only  in  the  one  church.  "...  How  can 
he  who  baptizes  give  to  another  remission  of  sins,  who  himself, 
being  outside  the  church,  cannot  i)ut  away  his  own  sins?  ^  .  .  . 
We  mean  that  remission  of  sins  is  not  granted  except  in  the 
Church,  and  that  among  heretics  where  there  is  no  church,  sins 
cannot  he  put  away."  '*  Cyprian's  problem  was  how  to  treat  those 
who  had  defiled  themselves  after  purification  in  baptism,  by  sacri- 
ficing to  the  pagan  gods  during  the  persecutions.  The  power  of 
the  divine  grace  in  the  water  (as  TertuUian  had  said)  had  been 
given  them  in  baptism,  and  this  they  could  not  lose.  Re-baptism 
of  those  who  had  lapsed 'was  therefore  not  necessary,  but  only 
the  laying-on  of  hands  in  penance. 

"It  is  sufficient  to  lay  hands  in  penance  upon  those  who  are 
known  to  have  been  baptized  in  the  Church,  and  have  gone  over  from 
us  to  the  heretics,  if,  subsequently  acknowledging  their  sin  and 
putting  away  their  error,  they  return  to  the  truth    .    .    .''  ^ 

This  laying-on  of  hands  he  also  calls  a  sacrament.  "For 
then  finally  can  they  be  fully  sanctified,  and  be  the  sons  of  God, 
if  they  be  born  of  each  sacrament."  ^ 

On  their  return  to  the  Church,  the  lapsed  were  to  make  public 
confession  and  do  penance,  but  Cyprian  does  not  specifically  refer 
to  this  as  a  sacrament. 

» Ep.  LXXIV.  8. 

*  Ep.  LXX.  I.  (LXIX  in  translation — only  the  argument  is  given  in  Migne). 

»  Ep.  LXX.  2. 

<  Ep.  LXXI.    Ad  Quintum. 

^  Ep.  LXXII.    Ad  Stephanum. 


\ 


<v 


1; 


\\ 


"For  although  in  smaller  sins  sinners  may  do  penance  for  a 
set  time,  and  according  to  the  rules  of  discipline  come  to  public 
confession,  and  by  imposition  of  the  hand  of  the  bishops  and  clergy 
receive  the  right  of  communion  :^  now  with  their  time  still  unful- 
filled, while  persecution  is  still  raging,  while  the  peace  of  the  Church 
itself  is  not  yet  restored,  they  are  admitted  to  communion,  and  their 
name  is  presented ;  and  while  the  penance  is  not  yet  performed,  con- 
fession is  not  yet  made,  the  hands  of  the  bishop  and  clergy  are  not 
yet  laid  upon  them,  the  eucharist  is  given  to  them."  ^ 

The  obvious  conclusion  from  such  a  passage  is  that  Cyprian 
thought  of  penance  as  a  ceremony  in  which  divine  grace  was 
given  to  the  penitent,  through  the  laying-on  of  hands,  and  if  so, 
penance  was  really  to  him  a  sacrament,  though  he  does  not  call 
it  so. 

Especially  interesting  is  Cyprian's  treatment  of  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  Eucharist.  Again,  as  in  baptism,  the  practical 
exigencies  of  church  administration  bring  the  bishop  of  Car- 
thage, through  directions  for  ritual,  to  a  statement  which  reveals 
his  conception  of  the  sacramental  efficacy  of  this  central  Chris- 
tian rite.  One  of  his  epistles  is  devoted  to  the  "sacrament  of  the 
cup  of  the  Lord."  ^  This  is  an  argument  for  the  mixed  chalice, 
and  especially  against  offering  water  alone  in  the  cup,  a  practice 
which,  as  Cyprian's  letter  shows,  had  spread  throughout  Africa 
generally  and  as  modern  scholars  have  demonstrated,  even  wider 
in  the  early  Church.*  Cyprian  argues  that  the  sacrament  would 
not  be  complete  if  water  only  were  offered.  "We  see  that  in  the 
water  is  understood  the  people,  but  in  the  wine  is  showed  the  blood 
of  Christ.    But  when  the  water  is  mingled  in  the  cup  with  wine, 


^  Nam,  cum  in  minoribus  peccatis  agsint  peccatores  poenitentiam  juste 
tempore,  et,  secundum  disciplinae  ordinem,  ad  exomologesim  veniant,  et  per 
manus  impositionem  episcopi  et  cleri  jus  communicationis  accipiant  .... 

2  Ep.  IX.  Ad  Clerum. 

3  Ep.  LXIII.  Ad  Caecilium  de  Sacramento  Dominici  calicis. 

^  Cyprian  (ibid.  c.  15.),  quoting  Tertullian  (Ad  Uxor.  II.  5.),  intimates  that 
they  drank  water  owing  to  the  fact  that  had  they  partaken  of  wine  in  the  morn- 
ing, they  would  have  been  detected  by  informers  and  suffered  persecution  owing 
to  the  scent  of  wine  on  the  breath. 


i-' 


^' 


i8 


PETER  LOMBARD 


the  people  is  made  one  with  Christ.  .  .  .  For  if  anyone  offer 
wine  only,  the  blood  of  Christ  is  dissociated  from  us;  but  if  the 
water  be  alone,  the  people  are  dissociated  from  Christ ;  but  when 
both  are  mingled,  and  are  joined  with  one  another  by  a  close 
union,  there  is  completed  a  spiritual  and  heavenly  sacrament."  ^ 
Cyprian's  plea  for  the  orthodox  ritual  shows,  almost  uncon- 
sciously, the  attitude  which  he  assumes  toward  sacraments  as  such. 

In  developing  his  point  Cyprian  uses  language  which  at  first 
glance  might  seem  like  a  detailed  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of 
sacraments.  But  upon  second  examination  one  sees  that  we  have 
here  simply  an  instance  of  that  rhetorical  and  apologetic  device 
so  common  in  the  Fathers — namely  allegory.  He  concludes  his 
explanation  of  the  mixed  chalice  with  a  repeated  emphasis  on  the 
Lord's  commandment  concerning  the  Eucharist. 

''But  if  we  may  not  break  even  the  least  of  the  Lord's  com- 
mandments, how  much  rather  is  it  forbidden  to  infringe  such  impor- 
tant ones,  so  great,  so  pertaining  to  the  very  sacrament  of  our  Lord's 
passion  and  our  own  redemption,  or  to  change  it  by  human  tradition 
into  anything  else  than  what  was  divinely  appointed."  ^ 

His  realization  of  the  importance  of  the  sacraments  comes 
out  quite  clearly  elsewhere.  It  seems  inexpedient  to  quote  further 
definite  references,  but  perhaps  the  following  passage  will  be  suffi- 
cient as  an  example.    He  speaks  of 

"those  divine  teachings  wherewith  the  Lord  has  condescended  to 
teach  and  instruct  us  by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  that,  being  led  away 
from  the  darkness  of  error,  and  enlightened  by  his  pure  and  shining 
light,  we  may  keep  the  way  of  life  through  the  saving  sacraments."  ^ 

It  will  be  clear  from  the  above  discussion  that  Cyprian,  em- 
phasizing on  the  one  hand  the  figurative  aspect,  and  on  the  other 
the  effective  grace  of  sacrament  as  a  means  of  salvation,  supplies 
the  two  "essential  elements  of  the  definition  of  sacrament,  as  it 
was  to  be  established  in  the  following  centuries."  * 


1  Ep.  LXIII.  13. 

2  Ibid.  14. 

3  Treatise  XII.    (Introd.) 

*  Poukens,  Sacramentum  dans  les  oeuvres  de  saint  Cyprien. 


1; 

I 

\ 


< 


\ 


I 
i 


\ 


I 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


19 


HILARY  OF  POITIERS  (c.  3OO-367) 

In  the  works  of  Hilary,  Bishop  of  Poitiers,  writing  about  a 
century  later  than  Cyprian,  in  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century, 
we  still  find  quite  frequently  the  vague  use  of  the  word  sacrament. 
As  in  earlier  writers,  for  instance,  he  speaks  of  Samuel  as  show- 
ing the  ''sacrament  of  anointing,"  both  of  a  prophet  and  of  a  king.^ 
Also,  in  his  Commentary  on  Matthew,  he  says  that  Christ  has 
promised  to  bear  the  burden  of  those  who  will  take  his  yoke  upon 
them,  that  is,  receive  the  precepts  of  his  commands,  and  approach 
him  **by  the  sacrament  of  the  cross."  ^  Again,  he  speaks  of  all 
mankind  being  called  "to  the  sacrament  of  the  passion  of  the 
Lord."  •' 

The  whole  of  the  practical  side  of  Christianity  as  a  system 
of  life  is  taken  for  granted  by  Hilary,  and  his  only  references  to 
baptism  and  the  Eucharist  are  incidental  to  his  discussion  of  doc- 
trinal problems,  such  as  that  of  Christology.  But  his  Chris- 
tological  problem  was  that  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  not  that  of 
the  nature  of  Christ  which  had  been  a  subject  of  dispute  at  the 
Council  of  Nicaea,  for  we  know  from  himself^  that  he  was  not 
acquainted  with  the  Nicene  symbol,  and  that  he  had  never  heard 
of  the  homoousion  and  homoiousion.  This  shows  how  little  the 
theology  of  the  West  w^as  influenced  by  the  East  in  this  period. 

Following  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  he  says  that 
as  we  are  buried  with  Christ  in  his  baptism, 

"we  must  die  to  the  old  man,  because  the  regeneration  of  baptism 
has  the  force  of  resurrection.  .  .  .  For  we  rise  again  in  him 
through  faith  in  God,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead ;  wherefore  we 
must  believe  in  God,  by  whose  working  Christ  was  raised  from  the 
dead,  for  our  faith  rises  again  in  and  with  Christ."  ^ 

Hilary's  mention  of  the  Eucharist  is  only  in  support  of  his 
argument  "that  Christ  is  God  and  man,  and  that  through  this 


1  Tract,  in  Ps.  CXVIII.  n.  5. 

2  Comment,  in  Matt.  c.  XI.  n.  13. 

3  Ibid.  c.  XXXIII.  n.  5. 

*  De  syn.  91,  II,  518  A. 

*  De  Trinitate.  IX.  9. 


-./ 


20 


PETER  LOMBARD 


union  must  come  the  union  of  man  with  God."  ^  The  Eucharist 
is  a  means  to  this  union. 

Hilary  proceeds  to  make  this  point  by  an  emphasis  upon  the 
Incarnation.  The  Word  became  flesh ;  that  flesh  is  offered  to  us 
in  the  sacrament;  therefore  we  partake  of  the  Word.  This  is  a 
natural  line  for  Christian  thought,  based  largely  upon  Pauline 
teaching;  but  as  stated  by  Hilary  it  makes  one  aware  of  the  fact 
that  the  Incarnation  itself  had  a  sacramental  aspect, — that  it  was 
the  union  of  God  and  man,  as  the  Eucharist  symbolized  the  union 
of  man  with  God,  and  although  the  Logos  was  spirit  rather  than 
merely  grace,  the  difficulty  of  grasping  that  fact  by  even  the  theo- 
logical imagination  is  apparent  in  the  very  emphasis  the  doctrine 
received.  Moreover,  as  one  traces  the  history  of  the  chief  Chris- 
tian sacrament,  the  Eucharist,  through  the  Middle  Ages,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Incarnation  is  seen  to  be  a  prerequisite  to  its  formula- 
tion.- 

As  Hilary  puts  it — 

"For  if  in  truth  the  Word  has  been  made  flesh  and  we  in  very 
truth  receive  the  Word  made  flesh  as  food  from  the  Lord,  are  we 
not  bound  to  believe  that  he  abides  in  us  naturally,  who,  born  as  a 
man,  has  assumed  the  nature  of  our  flesh  now  inseparable  from  him- 
self, and  has  conjoined  the  nature  of  his  own  flesh  to  the  nature  of 
the  eternal  Godhead  in  the  sacrament  by  which  his  flesh  is  com- 
municated to  us  ?"  ^ 

"For  as  to  what  we  say  concerning  the  reality  of  Christ's 
nature  within  us,  unless  we  have  been  taught  by  him,  our  words 
are  foolish  and  impious.  For  he  says  himself,  *My  flesh  is  meat 
indeed,  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and 
drinketh  my  blood  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him.'  As  to  the  verity 
©f  the  flesh  and  blood  there  is  no  room  left  for  doubt.  For  now 
both  from  the  declaration  of  the  Lord  Himself  and  our  own  faith, 
it  is  verily  flesh  and  verily  blood.    And  these  when  eaten  and  drunk, 


*  Cf.  E.  W.  Watson,  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  Introduction,  p.  v. 

*  On  this  see  further  the  influence  of  John  of  Damascus.    Compare  Harnack, 
History  of  Dogma,  IV,  pp.  265,  301  flf.  and  Goetz,  Die  Abendmahlsafrage,  p.  2. 

3  De  Trin.  VIII.  13. 


! 


< 


( 


i 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


21 


»» 1 


bring  it  to  pass  that  both  we  are  in  Christ  and  Christ  in  us.    .    . 

"Now  how  it  is  that  we  are  in  him  through  the  sacrament  of 
the  flesh  and  blood  bestowed  upon  us,  He  Himself  testifies,  saying, 
'And  the  world  will  no  longer  see  me,  but  ye  shall  see  me ;  because  I 
hve  ye  shall  Hve  also;  because  I  am  in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me, 
and  I  in  you.'  ...  He  would  have  us  believe  that  he  is  in  us 
through  the  mystery  of  the  sacraments.    .    .    .  ^ 

"I  have  dwelt  upon  these  facts  because  the  heretics  falsely  main- 
tain that  the  union  between  Father  and  Son  is  one  of  will  only,  and 
make  use  of  the  example  of  our  own  union  with  God,  as  though  we 
were  united  to  the  Son  and  through  the  Son  to  the  Father  by  mere 
obedience  and  a  devout  will,  and  none  of  the  natural  verity  of  com- 
munion were  vouchsafed  us  through  the  sacrament  of  the  Body  and 
Blood ;  although  the  glory  of  the  Son  bestowed  upon  us  through  the 
Son  abiding  in  us  after  the  flesh,  while  we  are  united  in  him  cor- 
poreally and  inseparably,  bids  us  preach  the  mystery  of  the  true  and 
natural  unity."  ^ 

In  other  words,  there  are  heretics  who  believe  that  Chris- 
tianity is  not  essentially  a  sacramental  religion,  who  insist  that 
the  ceremony  of  the  Eucharist — the  central  sacrament — is  merely 
a  symbol,  conveying  no  effective  grace.  Hilary  denounces  these 
on  the  solid  basis  of  orthodoxy.  He  adds  nothing  to  the  accepted 
belief,  but  on  the  contrary  he  receives  it  with  such  emphasis  that 
his  testimony  is  all  the  sounder  as  an  historical  document,  as  to 
w^hat  the  Church  in  his  day  in  the  West  w^as  holding. 

AMBROSE  (c.  340-397.) 

Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century, 
is  the  first  of  the  Western  Fathers  to  devote  an  entire  treatise  to 
the  subject  of  the  sacraments.  The  references  in  Irenaeus,  Ter- 
tullian  and  Hilary  were  only  incidental  to  their  discussion  of  other 
matters.  Ambrose  is  also  important  because  of  his  very  evident 
influence  on  his  younger  contemporary  and  pupil,  Augustine. 

Ambrose's  book,  "Concerning  the  Mysteries"  ^  was  written 

1  Ibid.  VIII.  14. 

2  Ibid.  VIII.  15. 

3  Lib.  de  Mysteriis. 


-.V 


22 


PETER  LOMBARD 


for  the  instruction  of  the  newly  baptized.  Because  of  the  Dis- 
ciph'ne  of  the  Secret,  which  we  have  mentioned  above,  this 
teaching  was  not  even  given  to  the  catechumens.  The  catechu- 
mens heard  the  lessons  read  from  the  Scriptures,  and  were  in- 
structed in  morals,  until  their  baptism.  As  Ambrose  puts  it  in 
the  introduction, 

"The  season  now  warns  us  to  speak  of  the  Mysteries,  and  to  set 
forth  the  purport  of  the  sacraments,  which  if  we  had  thought  it 
well  to  teach  before  baptism  to  those  who  were  not  yet  initiated, 
we  should  be  considered  rather  to  have  betrayed  than  to  have  por- 
trayed the  mysteries."  ^ 

In  this  book,  Ambrose  treats  of  baptism,  and  the  ceremonies 
that  followed  it,  including  confirmation,  and  the  Eucharist.  We 
find  here  the  basis  of  much  of  the  sacramental  teaching  of  later 
centuries,  but  even  so,  Ambrose  gives  us  no  definition  of  just  what 
he  understands  by  the  term  sacrament. 

Perhaps  the  following  passage  sums  up  the  essential  elements 
of  his  teaching  on  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 

"The  reason  why  you  were  told  before  not  to  believe  only  what 
you  saw,  was  that  you  might  not  say  perchance,  This  is  that  great 
mystery  'which  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  has  it  en- 
tered into  the  heart  of  man.'  2  i  see  water,  which  I  have  been  used 
to  see  every  day.  Is  that  water  to  cleanse  me  now  in  which  I  have 
so  often  bathed  without  ever  being  cleansed?  By  this  you  may 
recognize  that  water  does  not  cleanse  without  the  Spirit.^ 

"Therefore  read  that  the  three  witnesses  in  baptism,  the  water, 
the  blood,  and  the  Spirit,  are  one,  for  if  you  take  away  one  of  these, 
the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  does  not  exist.  For  what  is  water  with- 
out the  cross  of  Christ?  A  common  element,  without  any  sacra- 
mental effect.  Xor,  again,  is  there  the  Sacrament  of  Regeneration 
without  water:  *For  except  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.'  Now,  even  the 
catechumen  believes  in  the  cross  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  wherewith  he 
too  is  signed ;  but  unless  he  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 

^  Lib.  de  Myst.  c.  I.  2. 

^  I  Cor.  ii.  9. 

*  Lib.  de  Myst.  c.  IV.  19. 


< 


i 


< 


i  4 


< 


THE  EARLY  FATHERS 


23 


and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  cannot  receive  remission 
of  sins,  nor  gain  the  gift  of  spiritual  grace."  ^ 

One  passage,  in  the  general  discussion  of  baptism  and  its 
attendant  rites,  evidently  refers  to  confirmation. 

"And  then  remember  that  you  received  the  seal  of  the  Spirit, 
the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  the  spirit  of  counsel  and 
strength,  the  spirit  of  knowledge  and  godliness,  and  the  spirit  of 
holy  fear,  and  preserved  what  you  received.  God  the  Father  sealed 
you,  Christ  the  Lord  strengthened  you,  and  gave  the  earnest  of  the 
Spirit  in  your  heart,^  as  you  have  learned  in  the  lesson  from  the 
Apostle."  ^ 

Confirmation  is  here  rather  a  part  of  the  sacrament  of  bap- 
tism, than  a  separate  sacrament. 

He  compares  the  sacraments  of  the  Church  with  those  of  the 
synagogue,  to  show  that  those  of  the  Church  "are  both  more  an- 
cient than  those  of  the  synagogue,  and  more  excellent  than  the 
manna."  ^ 

"But  yet  all  those  who  ate  that  food  died  in  the  wilderness,  but  that 
food  which  you  receive,  that  living  Bread  which  came  down  from 
heaven,  furnishes  the  substance  of  eternal  life ;  and  whosoever  shall 
eat  of  this  Bread  shall  never  die,  and  it  is  the  Body  of  Christ."  ^ 

Ambrose  writes  further  of  the  Eucharist : 

"For  that  sacrament  which  you  receive  is  made  what  it  is  by  the 
word  of  Christ.  But  if  the  word  of  Elijah  had  such  power  as  to 
bring  down  fire  from  heaven,  shall  not  the  word  of  Christ  have 
power  to  change  the  nature  of  the  elements?"  ^ 

"The  Lord  Jesus  himself  proclaims :  This  is  my  Body.'  Before 
the  blessing  of  the  heavenly  words  another  nature  is  spoken  of,  after 
the  consecration  the  Body  is  signified.  He  himself  speaks  of  his 
Blood.  Before  the  consecration  it  has  another  name,  after  it  is 
called  Blood.    .    .    ."^ 


^  Lib.  de  Myst.  c.  IV.  20. 

2  2  Cor.  V.  5. 

'Lib.  de  Myst.  c.  VII.  42. 

*  Ibid.  c.  VIII.  44. 

6  Ibid.  c.  VIII.  47. 

« Ibid.  c.  IX.  52. 

'  Ibid.  c.  IX.  54. 


24 


PETER  LOMBARD 


< 


"Christ,  then,  feeds  his  Church  with  these  sacraments,  by  means 
of  which  the  substance  of  the  soul  is  strengthened."  ^ 

Though  we  have  still  no  attempt  at  a  definition  of  the  term 
sacrament,  we  have  in  these  passages  a  very  clear  exposition  of  the 
sacramental  idea,  which  was  bound  to  have  its  influence  on  the 
theology  of  the  later  Church. 

In  short,  Ambrose,  like  Cyprian  and  Hilar}%  was  an  ecclesi- 
astic with  a  definite  and  practical  problem.  Even  the  teaching, 
therefore,  which  he  embodies  in  his  manual  deals  not  with  general 
concepts  but  with  separate  and  detailed  facts  arising  naturally  in 
the  exercise  of  his  office  as  bishop.  Definitions  and  philosophical 
conceptions  originate  in  another  setting,  when  the  mind  that  sees 
the  daily  problem  is  either  forced  by  controversy  to  larger  form- 
ulations or  is,  on  the  contrary,  set  free  to  interpret  the  facts  with 
a  certain  detachment  of  mind.  In  Ambrose's  great  pupil  Augus- 
tine we  find  both  of  these  apparently  antagonistic  prerequisites, 
and  with  him  we  come  to  a  new  turn  in  the  development — a  dis- 
cussion of  the  term  itself  along  with  the  discussion  of  the  Euchar- 
ist and  baptism — and  to  this  advance  in  clarification  we  must 
devote  another  chapter. 


^  Ibid.  c.  IX.  55. 


N^ 


CHAPTER  II 

The  Formulation  of  the  Definition  of  Sacrament 

st.  augustine      (354-43o.) 

In  the  works  of  St.  Augustine,  we  find  the  first  attempt  at  a 
definition  of  sacrament.  He  does  not  develop  the  subject,  and 
gives  only  incidental  references  scattered  through  his  many  epis- 
tles, sermons  and  commentaries.  Indeed  his  ideas  on  sacrament 
seem  very  vague,  and  he  comes  back  again  and  again  to  add  some- 
thing to  his  definition. 

A  sacrament  is  a  "sacred  sign,"  ^  or  "signs,  when  they  per- 
tain to  divine  things,  are  called  Sacraments."  ^  In  another  place 
he  says  that  "A  sacrament  is  moreover  in  any  celebration,  when  a 
commemoration  of  a  thing  done  is  so  made,  that  something  else 
is  understood  to  be  signified,  which  must  be  accepted  devoutly."  ^ 

In  a  further  explanation,  Augustine  says  that  sacraments 
must  have  a  likeness  of  the  things  of  which  they  are  sacraments, 
else  they  are  in  no  wise  sacraments,  and  from  their  likeness  to 
these  things  they  receive  their  names.  So  according  to  this,  the 
sacrament  of  the  body  of  Christ  is  the  body  of  Christ.* 

Therefore  they  are  called  sacraments,  because  in  them  one 
thing  is  seen,  another  is  understood.^ 

But  perhaps  a  clearer  understanding  of  his  meaning  may 
be  secured  from  a  passage  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of 
John.     "  *Now  you  are  clean  through  the  word  which  I  have 


*  De  Civitate  Dei.  X.  c.  5. 

*  Ep.  138.  (alias  5.) 

'Ep.  55  (alias  119.)  ....  Sacramentum  est  autem  in  aliqua  celebratione, 
cum  rei  gestae  commemoratis  ita  fit,  ut  aliquid  etiam  significari  intelligatur, 
quod  sancte  accipiendum  est 

*  Ep.  98  (alias  23.) 

*  Sermon  272. 

25 


26 


PETER  LOMBARD 


spoken  unto  you/  Why  does  he  not  say,  you  are  clean  through 
the  Baptism  with  which  you  are  cleansed,  but  he  says,  'through  the 
word  which  I  have  spoken  unto  you' ;  unless  because  in  the  water 
also  it  is  the  word  that  cleanses  ?  Take  away  the  word,  and  what 
is  water  but  water?  Add  the  word  to  the  element,  and  there 
results  a  sacrament,  as  if  itself  also  a  kind  of  visible  word.  For 
certainly  also  he  said  this  when  he  washed  the  disciples'  feet: 
'Whoever  has  bathed  does  not  need  but  to  wash  his  feet,  but  is 
clean  every  whit.'  Whence  is  such  virtue  of  the  water,  that  it 
touches  the  body  and  cleanses  the  heart,  unless  it  is  done  by  the 
word,  not  because  it  is  spoken  but  because  it  is  believed?  For 
also  in  the  word  itself,  part  is  passing  sound,  part  the  virtue 
remaining."  ^ 

He  repeats  this  definition  in  another  work,  and  adds,  "The 
virtue  of  the  Word  has  cleansed  us  by  water,  because  he  walked 
on  the  waters."  ^ 

With  such  varied  ideas  making  up  his  definition  of  sacra- 
ment, it  is  not  surprising  that  his  uses  of  the  word  should  also  be 
very  vague.  He  speaks  of  Easter^  as  a  sacrament,  as  well  as  the 
allegory  of  sacred  numbers  which  he  sees  in  the  twenty-first 
chapter  of  John's  Gospel.*  Marriage,^  Ordination,®  circumcision, 
the  Sabbath,  and  other  observances  of  days  are  sacraments.^  He 
is  not  quite  consistent  when  he  calls  Noah's  ark  a  sacrament, 
because  of  its  likeness  to  baptism.^  He  even  uses  it  in  the  old 
sense  of  a  mystery,^ 


^ 


'  In  Joannem  Tract.  LXXX.  n.  3  .  .  .  .  Detrahe  verbum,  et  quid  est  aqua 
nisi  aqua?     Accedit  verbum  ad  elementum,  et  fit  Sacramentum,  etiam  ipsum 

tanquam  visibile  verbum Unde  ista  tanta  virtus  aquae,  ut  corpus  tangat 

et  cor  abluat,  nisi  faciente  verbo:  non  quia  dicitur,  sed  quia  creditur?  Nam  et  in 
ipso  verbo,  aliud  est  sonus  transiens,  aliud  virtus  manens. 

2  De  Cataclysmo. 

»  Ep.  55.  (alias  119.) 

*Ep.  55  (ad  Januarium).  c.  17. 

•  De  Bono  Conjugali.  c.  24. 

•Contra  Epistolam  Parmeniani.  II.  c.  XIII.  28. 
^  De  Spiritu  et  Littera.  Lib.  I.  c.  XXI. 
« Contra  Faustum.  Lib.  XIX.  c.  XII. 

•  Ep.  140.  c.  14.  Profundum  sacramentum  nos  intelligere  voluit. 


\. 


I 


1 

■ 


FORMULATION  OF  THE  DEFINITION  27 

To  the  sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist^  he  devotes 
more  attention  and  discusses  their  effect.^ 

The  sacraments  of  the  Old  Testament  were  "shadows"  ^  of 
those  of  the  New  Testament.  Those  of  the  New  Testament 
give  salvation,  those  of  the  Old  promised  a  Saviour.*  "Accord- 
ingly the  first  sacraments  which  were  observed  and  celebrated 
under  the  Law,  foretold  the  coming  Christ :  which  when  at  his 
advent  Christ  fulfilled,  were  destroyed;  and  destroyed  on  this 
account,  because  fulfilled  ...  and  others  were  instituted  of 
greater  virtue,  better  utility,  easier  of  performance,  fewer  in 
number."  ^ 

Perhaps  the  most  important  contribution  Augustine  made  to 
the  development  of  the  sacramental  theory  was  the  distinction  that 
he  so  carefully  drew  between  "sacraments". «  The  sacraments  may 
be  common  to  all,  but  not  the  grace,  which  is  the  virtue  of  the 
sacraments."^  Without  this  sanctification  of  invisible  grace,  the 
visible  sacraments  profit  nothing.^  However,  the  visible  sacra- 
ment is  not  to  be  scorned,  for  the  one  who  scorns  it  cannot  be 
invisibly  sanctified. 

It  is  this  distinction  which  he  follows  in  his  discussion  of  the 
validity  of  the  sacraments  of  heretics  and  other  wicked  persons. 
''Not  so  are  they  therefore  not  Sacraments  of  Christ  and  the 

*  Ep.  98.  9.  (alias  23.) 

*  De  Peccatorum  Mentis  et  Remissione.  Lib.  I.  c.  XXIV.  34. 
3  Ep.  82.  (alias  19).  14. 

*  Enarratio  in  Ps.  LXXIII.  2. 

» Contra  Faustum.  Lib.  XIX.  c.  13. 

•In  Joannis  Evang.  Tract.  XXVI.  c.  VI.   11 Nam  et  nos  hodie 

accipimus  visibilem  cibum:  sed  aliud  est  Sacramentum,  aliud  virtus  Sacra- 
menti  .... 

^Enarr.  in  Ps.  LXXVII.  2 Et  cum  essent  omnia  communia  sacra- 

menta,  non  communis  erat  omnibus  gratia,  quae  sacramentorum  virtus  est 

« Quaestionum  in  Heptateuchum.  Lib.  III.  q.  84.    Nam  sine  ista  sanctifica* 

tione  mvisibihs  gratiae,  visibilia  Sacramenta  quid  prosunt?  ....  Proinde  col- 

^^u"!"  J''"''^'^'^^"'   ^^^tificationem   quibusdam   affuisse   atque   profuisse   sine 

visibi  ibus  Sacramentis visibilem  vero  sanctificationem,  quae  fieret  per 

visibiha  Sacramenta,  sine  ista  invisibili  posse  adesse,  non  posse  prodesse.  Nee 
tamen  ideo  Sacramentum  visibile  contemnendum  est:  nam  contemptor  ejus 
mvisibiliter  sanctificari  nullo  modo  potest 


■\ 


28 


PETER  LOMBARD 


Church,  because  they  use  them  wrongly,  not  only  heretics,  but  also 
all  the  wicked  and  impious.  But  they  ought  however  to  be  either 
corrected  or  punished."  ^  The  sacraments,  which  those  separated 
from  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ  celebrate,  can  show  the  form 
of  piety,  but  the  invisible  and  spiritual  virtue  of  piety  cannot  be  in 
them.^  In  the  good,  the  sacraments  are  unto  salvation,  in  the 
evil  unto  damnation.^ 

It  is  by  this  virtue  of  the  sacraments,  grace,  that  "the  mem- 
bers of  the  Body  of  Christ  are  regenerated  with  their  Head."  * 
Baptism  he  calls  the  laver  of  regeneration.^  In  the  baptism  of 
an  infant,  **who  has  not  yet  the  effect  of  faith,  it  is  answered  that 
he  has  faith  on  account  of  the  sacrament  of  faith,  and  that  he  is 
converted  to  God  on  account  of  the  sacrament  of  conversion,  be- 
cause also  the  very  response  pertains  to  the  celebration  of  the 
sacrament."  ®  Sins  are  remitted  by  the  strength  of  the  sacra- 
ments. "^ 

To  sum  up,  St.  Augustine  gives  us  our  first  definitions  of 
sacrament,  and  the  distinction  between  the  sacrament  and  the 
virtue  of  the  sacrament,  which  is  of  so  much  importance  in  the 
later  development  of  the  sacramental  system.  But  although  his 
conception  of  sacrament  as  such  is  more  clarified  than  that  of  his 
predecessors,  he  makes  no  effort  to  delimit  the  scope.  He  does 
definitely  refer  to  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist  as  sacraments,  but 
is  also  vague  in  that  he  does  not  enumerate  what  ceremonies  are 
or  are  not  sacraments. 

ISIDORE  OF  SEVILLE  (c.  560-636) 

It  is  not  until  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century  that  the 
sacraments  became  again  a  subject  of  even  a  brief  discussion. 
Through  all  this  time  of  ignorance  and  barbarism  the  rites  of  the 


•  De  Bapt.  contra  Donatistas.  Lib.  III.  c.  X.  13. 
«  Sermo  LXXI.  c.  XIX. 

'  Contra  Donat.  Ep.  (vulgo,  De  Unitate  Ecclesiae.)    Lib.  I.  c.  XXI.  57. 
«  Enarr.  in  Ps.  LXXVII.  2. 

•  Enarr.  in  Ps.  LXXVII.  2. 

•  Ep.  XCVIII.  9.  (alias  23.) 

'  De  Bapt.  contra  Donat.  Lib.  IV.  c.  IV.  5. 


FORMULATION  OF  THE  DEFINITION 


29 


Church  were  undoubtedly  of  more  significance  than  its  theology, 
and  the  usages  of  the  Middle  Ages  were  being  consecrated  by  the 
vastly  extended  clergy,  spread  by  missionary  effort  through  the 
northern  peoples.  No  one,  therefore,  was  likely  seriously  to  spec- 
ulate concerning  the  validity  of  what  all  took  for  granted.  So  it 
is  rather  as  a  matter  of  antiquarian  interest  than  as  a  discussion 
of  a  live  issue  that  the  first  encyclopaedist  of  the  Dark  Ages, 
Isidore  of  Seville,  writing  in  Spain,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
seventh  century  takes  up  the  definition  of  sacrament,  as  a  part 
of  his  encyclopaedic  survey.  The  task  he  set  himself  was  to 
gather  together  all  the  available  learning  of  his  day,  in  his 
"Origines"  or  "Etymologies."  ^  In  the  section  devoted  to  the 
sacraments,  he  quotes  Augustine's  definition,  that  a  sacrament  is 
in  any  celebration,  which  signifies  something  holy.  The  sacra- 
ments then  are  ^'baptism  and  chrism,  the  body  and  blood."  ^ 

In  the  next  paragraph,  however,  Isidore  says  that  "they  are 
called  sacraments  on  this  account,  because  under  cover  of  material 
things  the  divine  virtue  works  salvation  secretly,  whence  also 
from  secret  virtues,  or  from  sacred,  they  are  called  sacraments."  ^ 
This  definition  is  a  notable  one,  because  it  again  brings  the  em- 
phasis on  mystery  in  the  sacrament.  Isidore  is  certainly  not  an 
original  thinker,  but  so  far  any  source  for  this  definition  seems 
unknown.  It  is  not  from  Tertullian,  from  whom  Isidore  learned 
so  much.* 


*  On  Isidore,  see  further  Ernest  Brehaut,  An  Encyclopedist  of  the  Dark 
Ages:  Isidore  of  Seville;  who  does  not,  however,  translate  chapter  XIX. 

*  Etymologies.  Bk.  VI.  cap.  XIX.  n.  39. 

» Etymologies.  Bk.  VI.  cap.  XIX.  n.  40.  Quae  ob  id  sacramenta  dicuntur, 
quia  sub  tegumento  corporalium  renrni  virtus  divina  secretins  salutem  (eorum- 
dem  sacramentorum)  operatur,  unde  et  a  secretis  virtutis,  vel  a  sacris  sacramenta 
dicuntur. 

I  have  omitted  the  words  in  parentheses,  because  these  seem  interpolated 
from  n.  41.  See  Heinrich  Schwarz— "Observationes  criticae  in  Isidori  His- 
palensis  Origenes." 

*  Maximilian  Klussmann,  "Excerpta  Tertullianea  in  Isidori  Hispalensis 
Etymologiis  collegit  et  explanavit." 


^ 


■v 


i 


CHAPTER  III 

The  Eucharistic  Controversy^ 

We  now  enter  upon  a  period  of  reflection  and  controversy 
concerning  the  Eucharist,  which  engaged  the  attention  of  theo- 
logians for  almost  two  centuries  till  it  reached  a  climax  in  the 
condemnation  of  Berengar  in  1079.  This  controversy  was  opened 
by  the  work  of  Paschasius  Radbertus,^  monk  of  Corbey  and  abbot 
about  842.  He  was  versed  in  the  theology  of  the  Eastern  Church, 
especially  in  the  work  of  Cyril  of  Alexandria  and  John  of 
Damascus,  and  from  them  and  yet  more  from  Augustine  did  he 
draw  his  inspiration,  though  in  the  main  his  treatment  follows 
that  of  Ambrose.  His  book  "Of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord" 
was  the  first  to  elaborate  for  western  Europe  the  doctrine  of  the 
miraculous  conversion  of  the  elements  in  the  Eucharist,  which  in 
the  twelfth  century  received  the  name  of  transubstantiation.^ 

Paschasius'  doctrine  of  the  miraculous  change  of  the  ele- 
ments into  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  after  the  consecra- 
tion by  the  priest  was  also  linked  up  with  the  mystical  conception 
of  the  spiritual  character  of  the  Lord's  presence  in  the  Euchar- 
ist For  instance,  he  says,  "These  mysteries  are  not  carnal, 
though  they  are  flesh  and  blood,  but  are  rightly  understood  as 
spiritual."  *  In  this  he  preserved  an  important  element  in  the 
teaching  of  Augustine.^  But  the  more  literal  conception  domi- 
nated.   Radbertus'  book  was  immediately  challenged  by  Rabanus 

*  On  this  whole  subject,  see  Goetz,  "Die  Abendmahlsfrage,"  pp.  15-22. 

*  On  Paschasius  Radbertus,  see  further,  de  Ghellinck,  Le  mouvement  theo- 
logique,  passim,  and  Ernst,  Die  Lehre  des  hi.  Paschasius  Radbertus  von  der 
Eucharistie,  Freiburg,  1896.    Goetz,  op.  cit.  pp.  3-10. 

*See  Gore,  Dissertations  on  Subjects  connected  with  the  Incarnation,  p. 
236.  "Paschasius  appears  beyond  all  reasonable  question  to  teach  a  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation. " 

*  Ep.  ad  Frudegardum.    (MSL  120.  1356.) 

»  Darwell  Stone,  A  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Eucharist.  I,  p.  217. 

30 


S 


> 


v> 


? 


t 


THE  EUCHARISTIC  CONTROVERSY 


31 


Maurus  (c.  776-856),  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  and  later,  at  the 
request  of  King  Charles  the  Bald,  by  Ratrammus  (d.  c.  868). 
These,  as  later  Berengar,  upheld  the  view  that  the  change  in  the 
elements  in  the  Eucharist  was  not  a  material  one,  but  only  spir- 
itual. 

This  whole  controversy  over  the  nature  of  the  conversion  of 
the  elements  is  of  interest  to  us  here  only  because  it  brought  a 
new  emphasis  and  importance  to  the  conception  of  sacrament. 
For  a  long  time  however  there  was  no  real  change  in  the  expres- 
sions used  in  the  definitions  of  the  term.  The  phrases  used  by 
Augustine  and  Isidore  are  repeated  again  and  again  by  all  the 
writers  of  the  period,  and  it  is  only  with  Berengar  that  we  find  a 
really  new  definition — and  this  he  attributed  to  St.  Augustine. 

Paschasius  Radbertus  himself,  who  began  this  great  contro- 
versy by  the  publishing  in  831  of  his  book  "Of  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  the  Lord,"  takes  his  definition  from  Isidore — "The 
sacraments  of  Christ  in  the  Church  are  baptism  and  chrism,  and 
also  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  which  are  called  sacraments 
on  this  account,  because  under  their  visible  form,  which  is  seen, 
the  flesh  is  secretly  consecrated  by  the  divine  virtue."  ^  There  is 
nothing  original  in  this  definition  of  sacrament,  for  it  is  taken 
almost  word  for  word  from  Isidore.^  It  is  a  very  definite  use  of 
the  term,  but  alongside  it,  in  the  very  same  passage,  we  find  that 
Paschasius  uses  it  in  the  old  vague  sense,  when  he  speaks  of  our 
redemption  "by  the  sacrament  of  Christ's  nativity  and  hu- 
manity." ^ 

Rabanus  Maurus*  rejection  of  the  theory  of  a  miraculous 
conversion  of  the  elements  naturally  had  an  effect  on  his  concep- 
tion of  the  term  sacrament.    He  begins  his  discussion  by  quoting 


*  Lib.  de  Corpore  et  Sang.  Domini,  c.  III.  2.  Sunt  autem  sacramenta 
Christi  in  Ecclesia  baptismus  et  chrisma,  corpus  quoque  Domini  et  sanguis, 
quae  ob  hoc  sacramenta  vocantur,  quia  sub  eorum  specie  visibili,  quae  videtur, 
secretins  virtute  divina  caro  consecratur. 

^  See  p.  29. 

'  Ibid.  Sacramento  vero  nativitatis  et  humanitatis  ejus,  et  nos  redimimur 
ad  veniam 


^ 


32 


PETER  LOMBARD 


Augustine's  definition  and  adds  to  it  Isidore's,  giving  also  his 
enumeration  of  the  sacraments.  He  adds,  however,  that  "in 
Greek  it  is  called  a  mystery,  because  it  has  a  hidden  dispensa- 
tion." 1 

"Yet  there  are  more  forms  of  baptism,  which  purge  a  man  of 
sins  and  confer  an  increase  of  sanctity."  Besides  the  baptism  of 
water,  there  are  the  baptisms  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  martyr- 
dom.* 

In  the  same  passage  he  says,  "For  souls  are  believed  to  be 
saved  from  the  chains  of  sins  through  confession  and  through 
true  penance^  with  the  sting  of  tears,"  but  he  seems  to  find  noth- 
ing sacramental  in  this,  and  does  not  include  penance  in  his  list 
of  sacraments. 

The  significant  point  for  us,  here,  is  that  he  bases  his  belief  in 
a  spiritual  rather  than  a  material  change  in  the  Eucharistic  ele- 
ments on  Augustine's  distinction  between  the  sacrament  and  the 
virtue  of  the  sacrament.  "The  sacrament  indeed  is  received  in 
the  mouth,  the  inner  man  is  satisfied  with  the  virtue  of  the  sacra- 
ment. Therefore  because  bread  strengthens  the  body,  so  it  is  fitly 
called  the  body  of  Christ:  wine  moreover,  because  it  affects  the 
blood  in  the  flesh,  so  it  is  referred  to  the  blood  of  Christ.  These 
moreover  while  they  are  visible,  sanctified  then  through  the  holy 
Spirit  are  changed  into  the  sacrament  of  the  divine  body."  * 

This  view,  that  the  elements  are  changed  "into  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  divine  body"  is  a  contrast  to  the  view  of  Paschasius, 
that  the  elements  are  changed  into  the  real  flesh  and  blood  of 
Christ,  and  which  therefore  maintains  the  identity  of  the  Euchar- 
istic and  historical  body  of  Christ. 

The  opposition  of  the  views  of  Rabanus  Maurus  and  others 


*  De  Universo.  Lib.  V.  c.  ii. 

Also  in  De  Clericorum  Institutione.  Lib.  L  c.  24.  and  De  Ecclesiastica 
Disciplina.  Lib.  IL 

Unde  et  graece  mysterium  dicitur,  quod  reconditam  habeat  dispensa- 
tionem. 

*  De  Universo.  ibid. 

*  Poenitentia.    De  Universo.  Lib.  V.  c.  11. 
*De  Universo.  Lib.  V.  c.  11. 


< 


> 


i' 


I' 


\k' 


w 


\ 


i 


THE  EUCHARISTIC  CONTROVERSY 


ZZ 


seems  to  have  impelled  Paschasius  Radbertus  to  send  a  second 
edition  of  his  book,  with  a  letter  to  King  Charles  the  Bald,  request- 
ing him  to  have  the  question  decided.  King  Charles  sent  the  book 
to  another  monk  of  Corbe,  Ratramnus,  giving  him  two  questions 
to  answer,  concerning  this  controversy  about  the  Eucharist.  ( i ) 
Is  the  Eucharist  the  body  of  Christ  in  a  mystery  or  in  reality? 
(2)  What  is  the  relation  of  the  Eucharistic  to  the  natural  body? 
These  questions  of  course  rather  limited  the  scope  of  his  "Of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord,"  and  he  was  not  at  liberty  to  develop 
the  subject  as  he  might  otherwise  have  done.  Paschasius  had 
maintained  that  after  the  consecration  by  the  words  of  Christ, 
his  body  and  his  blood  were  present  on  the  altar. ^  To  Ratramnus 
the  bread  and  wine  became,  not  palpably,  but  figuratively  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ.^  He  defends  his  position  by  quoting 
from  some  of  the  same  authorities  as  Paschasius  had  used,  and 
from  several  passages  we  learn  how  his  idea  of  sacrament  was 
based  upon  these.  He  gives  Augustine's  definition  that  sacra- 
ments must  have  the  likeness  of  the  things  of  which  they  are  the 
sacraments.^  To  this  he  adds  the  distinction  between  the  "sacra- 
ment" *  and  the  "thing  of  the  sacrament."  "We  confess  that  in 
the  sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  what  is  received 
without,  is  applied  to  the  nourishment  of  the  body :  the  Word  of 
God  moreover,  which  is  the  bread  invisibly  existing  in  this  sacra- 
ment, invisibly  by  its  participation,  feeds  the  minds  of  the  faith- 
ful by  vivifying  them."  ^  From  Isidore  he  quotes  Augustine's 
"A  sacrament  is  moreover  in  any  celebration  when  a  commemora- 
tion .  .  .  is  so  made,  that  something  else  is  understood  to  be 
signified    ..."    "Saying  this  he  shows  that  every  sacrament 


^  Goetz,  Die  Abendmahlsfrage,  pp.  3-10. 

^Goetz,  p.  II. 

3  De  Corpore  et  Sanguine  Domini.  XXXV. 

*  Ibid.  XXXVL 

'Ibid.  XLIV.  Ista  dicendo  confitemur  quod  in  sacramento  corporis  et 
sanguinis  Domini,  quidquid  exterius  sumitur,  ad  corporis  refectionem  aptatur: 
Verbum  autem  Dei,  qui  est  panis  invisibiliter  in  illo  existens  sacramento,  invisi- 
biliter  participatione  sui  fidelium  mentes  vivificando  pascit. 


■gip— 


34 


PETER  LOMBARD 


in  divine  things  contains  some  secret;  and  there  is  something 
which  appears  visibly,  something  else  in  truth— which  must  be 
accepted  invisibly."^  He  follows  Isidore  still  farther,  that 
"under  the  cover  of  material  things,  the  divine  virtue  works  salva- 
tion secretly."  ^  The  sacraments  are  baptism,  chrism,  the  body 
and  blood — the  enumeration  which  Isidore  gave.^  "Therefore 
they  are  called  sacraments,  because  in  them  something  is  seen, 
something  else  is  understood :  what  is  seen,  has  a  corporeal  form ; 
what  is  understood,  has  spiritual  fruit."  ^ 

The  teaching  of  Ratramnus  had  considerable  currency  in  the 
later  period.  It  reappears  even  in  the  "Homilies"  of  the  English 
Aelfric  (c.  955-1020?),  and  as  we  shall  see  shortly  figured  prom- 
inently in  the  Berengarian  controversy,  but  later,  as  the  views  it 
advanced  were  definitely  branded  as  heretical,  it  dropped  from 
sight  until,  again  at  the  Protestant  reformation,  it  interested  the 
Protestant  theologians." 

BERENGAR  OF  TOURS   (d.    IO88) 

The  training  of  Berengar  was  unusual  for  his  day.  His 
earlier  interests  were  in  dialectic  and  the  Roman  Classical  authors, 
from  whom  he  derived  a  freer  method  than  had  been  common. 
Later  he  came  to  a  study  of  the  Bible  and  of  the  Church  Fathers, 
especially  Gregory  the  Great  and  Augustine,  but  also  Ambrose 


'  De  Corp.  et  Sang.  Dom.  XLV. 

« Ibid.  XCIII. 

»  An  instance  of  this  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  it  was  translated  into  English 
by  Humfrey  Linde  in  1549,  under  the  title  "The  Book  of  Bertram  the  Priest 
concerning  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament." 

Nicholas  Ridley,  bishop  of  London,  quoted  it  during  his  conference  with 
Secretary  Bourn:  "Sir.  it  is  certain  that  other  before  these  (e.  g.  Caristadt, 
Melanchthon,  etc.)  have  written  of  this  matter;  not  by  the  way  only,  and  obiter, 
as  do  for  the  most  of  all  the  old  writers,  but  even  ex  professo,  and  their  whole 
books  entreat  of  it  alone,  as  Bertram." 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Catholics  accused  the  Protestants  of  forging 
the  work.  Bourn  says  to  Ridley:  "He  wrote  ad  Henricum  (meaning  Henry  VIII), 
and  not  ad  Carolum,  for  no  author  maketh  any  such  mention  of  Bertramus." 

A  Conference  between  Nicholas  Ridley  and  Secretary  Bourn,  Ridley,  Works 
pp.  158-159. 


I 


^ 


/ 


i^ 


( 


¥ 


L 


k 


r 


\ 


THE  EUCHARISTIC  CONTROVERSY  35 

and  Jerome.*  As  a  pupil  of  Fulbert^  at  the  famous  school  of 
Chartres,^  he  was  much  influenced  by  the  teaching  of  his  master, 
somewhat  by  his  ideas,*  but  was  not  won  over  to  his  traditional 
theology  of  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  Ages.^ 

About  103 1  he  was  made  Canon  of  Tours  and  head  of  the 
cathedral  school,  where  he  had  many  pupils.  Before  1040  he  was 
elected  Archdeacon  of  Angers,  but  continued  to  reside  at  Tours. 
During  the  next  ten  years  he  developed  views  concerning  the  Eu- 
charist which  led  to  a  controversy  far  more  acute  than  that  of 
the  ninth  century.  His  view  was  one  of  opposition  to  the  accepted 
belief  of  the  Church  of  his  day,  in  a  change  in  the  substance  of 
the  Eucharistic  elements.  Before  1050  he  was  receiving  letters 
asking  him  to  deny  the  heretical  views  concerning  the  Eucharist 
which  he  was  supposed  to  entertain.  He  evidently  considered 
himself  orthodox,  for  early  in  1050  he  wrote  to  Lanfranc,  then 
Prior  of  Bee,  affirming  that  he  held  the  doctrine  of  John  Scotus 
Erigena  concerning  the  Eucharist,  and  rejected  that  of  Pasch- 
asius,  and  declaring  that  if  Lanfranc  regarded  John  the  Scot  as  a 
heretic,  he  must  similarly  condemn  Ambrose,  Jerome  and  Augus- 
tine. By  a  curious  mistake  of  the  period,  however,  it  was  Ratram- 
nus* book  "Of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord"  to  which  he 
was  referring  as  the  work  of  John  the  Scot.  His  attitude, 
though,  differed  radically  from  that  of  Ratramnus — it  was  con- 
troversial rather  than  positive.     His  methods  and  terms  were 


*  Jacobi  (Hauck)  in  Realencyklopadie,  article  Berengar  von  Tours. 

See  also,  Hermann  Reuter,  Geschichte  der  religidsen  Aufklarung  im  Mit- 
telalter,  passim. 

'  Fulbert  of  Chartres  was  not  an  original  thinker — ^his  importance  was  as  a 
teacher,  and  his  influence  is  shown  in  the  splendid  theological  training  he  gave 
his  pupils,  among  whom  perhaps  the  most  important  was  Berengar.  Reuter 
(p.  89)  says  of  him,  "Nicht  fahig  originelle  Gedanken  zu  entwickehi  und  mit- 
zuteilen,  hat  Fulbert  als  Bildner  der  Eigentumlichkeit  begabter  Schuler  seine 
Virtuositat  in  der  anregenden  Kraft  seines  Umgangs  gezeigt." 

'  On  Berengar  of  Tours,  see  also  Jean  Ebersolt,  Essai  sur  Berenger  de  Tours 
et  la  controverse  sacramentaire  au  Xle  si^cle.  Revue  de  I'histoire  des  religions, 
vol.  48.  1903.  pp.  1-42,  137-181. 

*  Darwell  Stone,  op.  cit.  I,  p.  244. 

*  Jacobi,  ibid. 


^ 


36 


PETER  LOMBARD 


those  of  the  new  dialectic.  He  had  indeed  been  accused  of 
"deserting  authorities  and  taking  refuge  in  dialectic,"  ^  to  which 
he  replied  that  "to  take  refuge  in  dialectic  through  all  obstacles 
is  the  mark  of  the  best  judgment;  because  to  take  refuge  in 
dialectic  is  to  take  refuge  in  reason,  and  he  who  does  not  take 
refuge  there,  seeing  that  it  is  in  virtue  of  the  possession  of  rea- 
son that  man  is  made  in  the  image  of  God,  has  deserted  his  own 
honor,  and  cannot  be  renewed  from  day  to  day  in  the  image  of 
God."  2 

The  letter  to  Lanfranc,  spoken  of  above,  had  a  most  unfor- 
tunate effect  on  Berengar's  career.  For  its  recipient  was  in  Rome 
when  the  letter  reached  him,  and  since  it  had  already  been  read 
by  others,  he  gave  the  matter  over  to  the  pope,  to  save  his  own 
reputation  for  orthodoxy.  Successive  Church  councils  excom- 
municated Berengar  and  condemned  his  writings,  and  with  them 
the  book  of  Ratramnus,  on  which  he  had  depended.  Thrice  did 
he  recant  and  sign  the  statements-*  which  the  authorities  presented, 
and  at  the  end  he  could  only  purchase  peace  by  his  silence  and 
retirement. 

From  this  long  period  of  controversy  comes  his  best  known 
work,  "Of  the  Sacred  Feast"*  and  in  it  along  with  his  contro- 
versial discussion  of  the  Eucharist,  there  is  a  treatment  of  the 
conception  of  sacrament,  which  contains  a  new  definition  of  the 
term — "a  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace."  ^  He 
attributes  this  to  St.  Augustine,  but  he  gives  no  reference  as  he 
usually  does  in  quoting  the  Fathers.  This  definition  is  not  found 
in  Augustine,  though  perhaps  it  rests  upon  the  passage  in  which 


»  See  Berengarii  Turonensis— De  Sacra  Coena,  adv.  Lanfrancum,  edit.  A.  F. 
and  F.  Th.  Vischer.  p.  99. 

*  Ibid.  p.  loi. 

» These  decrees  may  be  found  in  Darwell  Stone,  op.  dt.  I,  pp.  247-257  and 
again  in  the  article  by  the  same  on  Berengar  in  Hastings'  Encyclopaedia  of 
Religion  and  Ethics. 

For  a  further  discussion  of  the  controversy  cf.  Gore,  op.  cit.  pp.  247  flF. 

*  The  manuscript  was  discovered  by  Lessing  in  the  library  at  Wolfenbuttel. 
*De  Sacra  Coena.  op.  cit.  p.  114.    Est  enim  sacramentum  praescribente 

beato  Augustino  invisibUis  graiiae  visibilis  forma. 


^ 


> 


> 


THE  EUCHARISTIC  CONTROVERSY 


37 


he  asks,  "For  without  this  sanctification  of  invisible  grace,  of  what 
value  are  the  visible  sacraments?"  ^  We  have  already  noted  that 
Berengar  was  greatly  influenced  by  Ratramnus,  but  this  definition 
he  found  neither  in  the  work  of  Ratramnus,  nor  in  that  of  John 
the  Scot  himself,  nor  did  it  come  from  Fulbert  of  Chartres. 

The  distinction  between  "sacramentum"  and  the  "res  sacra- 
menti"  he  made  the  basis  of  his  argument  for  a  more  spiritual  con- 
ception of  the  Eucharist.  The  "sacramentum"  or  the  sacred  sign 
is  opposed  to  the  "res  sacramenti,"  that  which  is  signified  by  the 
sacrament.  "The  sacrament  is  visible,  the  thing  of  the  sacrament 
{res  sacramenti)  is  invisible."  ^  In  his  interpretation  of  the  pas- 
sage "If  any  man  eat  of  this,  he  shall  not  die  for  ever,"  he  quotes 
Augustine  that  this  "pertains  to  the  virtue  of  the  sacrament,  not 
because  it  pertains  to  the  visible  sacrament."  ^ 

LANFRANC  (d.  I089) 

Berengar's  personal  friend,  Lanfranc,  who  was  the  famous 
teacher  of  logic  and  dogmatic  theology  at  Bee,  was  naturally 
called  upon  to  defend  the  doctrine  of  the  conversion  of  the  ele- 
ments. This  defence  interested  and  occupied  him  for  thirty  years, 
and  to  his  influence  was  due  the  desertion  of  Berengar's  cause  by 
Hildebrand  and  others  at  the  Roman  court.  Lanfranc's  views 
on  the  whole  subject  of  the  Eucharist  he  sums  up  in  his  book  "Of 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord"  written  some  years  after  he 
became  archbishop  of  Canterbury.  In  this  he  defines  sacrament 
in  several  different  ways.  A  sacrament  is  "a  sacred  sign,"  *  but 
this  is  only  one  meaning  of  the  term  to  Lanfranc. 

"Sacraments  indeed  of  those  things  of  which  there  are  sacra- 
ments always  bear  a  likeness,  just  as  in  the  sacrament,  concerning 


^Quaestionum  in  Heptateuchum.  Lib.  III.  q.  84.    Nam  sine  ista  sanctifi- 
catione  invisibilis  gratiae,  visibilia  sacramenta  quid  prosunt? 

*  De  Sacra  Coena.  p.  245. 

*  De  Sacra  Coena.  p.  245.     Inquit,  sed  quod  pertinet  ad  virtutem  sacra- 
menti, non  quod  pertinet  ad  visibile  sacramentum. 

[John  6,  51  b.j 

*  De  Corp.  et  Sang.  Domini,  c.  12. 


^ 


1^ 


38 


PETER  LOMBARD 


which  the  question  is  raised,  while  the  host  is  broken,  while  wine 
is  poured  from  the  chalice  into  the  mouths  of  the  faithful,  what 
other  is  represented  than  the  sacrificing  of  the  body  of  the  Lord 
on  the  cross  and  the  pouring  forth  of  blood  from  his  sideP''^ 
"In  the  form  of  bread  and  wine,  which  we  see,  we  honor  things 
invisible,  that  is  the  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ."  ^ 

"A  sacrament  is  also  called  an  oath,  not  because  it  has  the 
likeness  of  that  thing,  but  because  a  confirmation  or  negation  of 
something  is  made  on  sacred  things."  *  In  this  he  returns  to  one 
of  the  original  meanings  of  the  Latin  word  "sacramentum," 
which  we  have  already  noted  in  Tertullian— the  military  oath. 
However  he  comes  shortly  to  the  more  general  concept,  with  the 
remark  that  "A  sacrament  is  also  called  a  consecration  of  any- 
thing."  1  With  this  rather  vague  conception  of  sacrament  he 
names  as  the  four  ecclesiastical  sacraments :  faith,  baptism,  the 
consecration  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  the  remission  of 
sins.^ 

With  Berengar  and  his  opponent  Lanfranc  and  others  ends  a 
period  in  which  the  cruder  views  have  begun  to  disappear.  As 
the  page  of  history  is  turned,  the  rising  Scholasticism  of  the 
twelfth  century  takes  up  the  task  of  formulating  the  doctrine  of 
conversion,  which  these  controversies  had  clarified. 

"  De  Corp.  et  Sang.  Domini,  c.  13. 
*  De  Celanda  Confessione. 


< 


> 


•  •  I  * 


'"WL^ 


m: 


CHAPTER  IV 

Efforts  After  Codification 

In  the  survey  of  thought  which  leads  to  Peter  Lombard  we 
have  now  reached  a  period  full  of  life  and  movement,  crowded 
with  significant  names,  and  we  shall  do  well  at  the  outset  to 
gain  some  appreciation  of  the  interrelations  between  these 
teachers.^  We  have  indeed  come  to  a  time  of  codification.  For 
centuries  men  have  been  laboriously  threading  their  way  through 
mazes  of  thought  concerning  the  sacraments,  without  much  seri- 
ous attempt  to  deal  with  the  problem  as  a  whole.  The  hour  has 
now  come  for  them  to  gather  opinions  and  decisions  and  codify 
them  into  systems. 

In  this  period  Paris  and  Bologna  are  the  great  centers  of 
teaching  and  disputation,  and  in  these  two  classes  are  discern- 
ible—canonists and  theologians.  The  canonists  were  connected 
in  larger  measure  with  Bologna,  as  were  the  theologians  with 
Paris,  and  when  the  great  wave  of  eagerness  for  learning  came 
over  Europe,  the  stamp  which  these  men  had  given  continued  and 
the  University  of  Paris,  when  founded,  became  prevailingly  an 
institution  for  the  cultivation  of  theology,  as  Bologna  was  the 
first  law  school. 

The  interest  in  codification  was  true  of  both  these  lines  of 
ecclesiastical  study,  and  reached  its  climax  at  the  middle  of  the 
twelfth  century  in  the  two  great  text-books,  Gratian^s  "Decre- 
tum,"  the  culmination  of  the  work  of  the  canonists,  and  Peter 
Lombard's  "Sentences,"  which  in  a  similar  way  presents  the  con- 
clusions of  the  theologians. 

While  most  of  the  Masters  who  prepared  the  way  for  these 

»  On  this  period,  see  Hastings  RashdaU,  Universities  of  Europe  in  the  Mid- 
ale  Ages,  passim. 

Also,  de  Ghellinck,  Le  Mouvement  thdologique,  passim. 

39 


40 


PETER  LOMBARD 


works  studied  either  Canon  Law  or  Theology,  a  few  devoted 
themselves  to  both,  though  canonists  could  never  wholly  divest 
themselves  of  theological  speculation  nor  theologians  of  the  fas- 
cination of  the  law.  As  the  body  of  knowledge  increased  and  the 
provinces  of  law  and  theology  were  more  clearly  defined,  it  be- 
came impossible  or  unadvi sable  for  one  man  to  master  both.  It 
will  be  convenient,  however,  in  this  discussion  to  divide  the 
teachers  rather  arbitrarily  into  the  two  classes  of  the  canonists 
and  theologians,  and  to  begin  the  subject  with  the  canonists. 

ANSELM  OF  LUCCA 

The  first  of  these  to  demand  attention  is  Anselm  of  Lucca 
(d.  1086),  the  nephew  of  the  Anselm  of  Lucca  who  became 
Pope  Alexander  II,  who  made  one  of  the  earliest  collections  of 
canon  law.  In  the  ninth  book  of  this  collection,  which  he  devotes 
to  the  sacraments,  he  names  only  those  of  the  altar,  baptism  and 
confirmation.^  No  one  can  be  saved  without  baptism,  and  with- 
out it  no  one  ought  to  participate  in  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord.2  However,  the  imposition  of  hands  by  the  bishop  is  to  be 
venerated  rather  than  baptism.^  He,  too,  makes  the  distinction 
between  the  sacrament  and  its  virtue,  for  "the  virtue  of  the  sacra- 
ment is  not  in  sacraments  which  those  separated  from  the  Church 
celebrate."  *  Heretics  have  sacraments  and  the  Scriptures  only 
in  semblance,  not  for  salvation.'*  In  these  last  opinions  he  is 
resting  upon  Augustine's  teaching.®  This  collection  of  canons  was 
incorporated  almost  entire  in  the  Decretum  of  Gratian,  and  there- 
fore exercised  a  great  influence  on  the  development  of  canon  law. 

IVO  OF  CHARTRES 

Ivo  of  Chartres,  one  of  the  most  fruitful  and  learned  ecclesi- 
astical writers  of  the  late  eleventh  and  early  twelfth  century,  is 

^  Collectio  Canonica.  Lib.  IX. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  c.  27. 
» Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  c.  26. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  c.  56. 

•  Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  c.  39. 

•  See  p.  28. 


< 


/ 


EFFORTS  AFTER  CODIFICATION 


41 


-is 


I 

t 


best  known  for  his  work  as  a  canonist.  His  first  work  was  the 
"Decretum"  in  seventeen  books,  which  served  as  the  basis  for  his 
more  perfectly  organized  and  well-arranged  "Panormia" 
in  eight  books,  compiled  about  1095  or  1096.  He  Wilds  on  the 
work  of  Burchard  of  Worms  and  on  other,  unknown  sources,  and 
is,  in  turn,  one  of  the  most  important  forerunners  of  Gratian. 
His  views  on  the  sacraments  we  see  not  only  in  his  writings  on 
canon  law  but  also  in  several  of  his  sermons.  He  speaks  of  the 
sacraments  of  the  Eucharist  and  of  baptism,  but  also  vaguely 
and  indefinitely  of  exorcisms,  prayers,  signing  with  the  cross, 
the  salt  on  the  catechumens'  tongue,  and  holy  water,  as  sacra- 
ments. He  treats  of  Penance  and  of  the  seven  orders  of  the 
clergy,  but  does  not  call  them  sacraments.*  His  discussion  of  the 
seven  orders  of  the  clergy  became  the  Tractate  on  orders  added 
by  a  later  hand  to  the  "Summa  Sententiarum,"  and  so  became, 
indirectly,  a  source  for  Peter  Lombard's  treatment  of  the  sub- 
ject in  the  fourth  book  of  his  "Sentences." 

ALGER  OF  LIEGE    (d.   C.    II31) 

Alger  of  Liege,  who  acquired  great  renown  in  canon  law  and 
theology  in  the  early  part  of  the  twelfth  century.  In  his  "Trac- 
tate of  Mercy  and  Justice"  he  attempted  to  harmonize  the  seem- 
ing contradictions  in  the  canon  law,  and  in  so  doing  gave  many 
citations  from  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers,  as  proofs  of  his 
statements.  This  was  one  of  the  most  important  sources  of 
Gratian's  "Decretum,"  for  in  it  Gratian  not  only  found  the 
Patristic  citations  that  he  needed,  but  also  the  explanatory  chapter 
titles  which  the  so-called  Dicta  Gratiani  often  borrowed,  and  from 
it  adopted  the  arrangement  of  the  book. 

In  theology,  his  book  "Concerning  the  Sacraments  of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord"  ranked  with  the  writings  of  Lan- 
franc  and  Guitmund  of  Aversa  in  maintaining  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation  against  the  writings  of  Berengar  which  had 
been  condemned  more  than  thirty  years  before.     He  was  one  of 

»  Sermo  I,  II,  IV,  V,  VIII;  Decreti  Pars  I,  II. 


>- 


y^ 


42 


PETER  LOMBARD 


the  first  to  explain  how  the  accidents  of  the  Eucharist  exist  with- 
out the  subject.  He  discusses  the  meaning  of  sacrament  in  the 
first  book  of  this  work,  and  gives  the  same  definition  which  Ber- 
engar  had  given — "the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace."  It  was 
not  because  he  approved  the  opinions  of  that  condemned  heretic, 
but  because  he  accepted  that  writer's  accrediting  of  it  to  Augus- 
tine, and  unlike  Berengar,  gave  the  reference  to  the  Questions 
on  Leviticus.^  '"Moreover  it  must  be  known  that  a  sacrament 
and  mystery  differ  in  this,  that  a  sacrament  is  a  sign  signifying 
something  visible,  but  a  mystery,  something  hidden  signified 
by  it."  2 

He  also  quotes  Augustine's  definition  that  a  sacrament  must 
have  the  likeness  of  that  of  which  it  is  a  sacrament,  and  makes 
the  distinction  between  the  sacrament  and  the  "virtue  of  the 
sacrament."  ^  He  enumerates  only  the  usual  three  sacraments — 
baptism,  chrism,  and  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord.* 

GRATIAN  (C.  IO95-C.  1 150) 

We  have  already  mentioned  three  of  the  most  famous  early 
canonists,  and  come  now  to  the  master  of  the  science  of  canon 
law,  Gratian,  whose  work  rests  upon  that  of  his  predecessors, 
but  greatly  surpasses  theirs.  The  very  title  of  his  book — "Con- 
cordia  Discordantium   Canonum"  ^    (about    1142) — defines   his 


> 


^  De  Sacram.  Corporis  et  Sang.  Domini.  Lib.  I.  c.  IV.  (Refer,  in  Aug. : 
Quaest.  in  Heptat.  q.  84.) 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  I.  c.  IV.  Sciendum  autem  quod  sacramentum  et  mysterium  in 
hoc  differunt,  quia  sacramentum  signum  est  visibile  aliquid  significans,  mys- 
terium vero  aliquid  occultum  ab  eo  significatum. 

» Ibid.  Lib.  I.  c.  V. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  I.  c.  VIII.    Also  Lib.  III.  c.  V. 

*  Commonly  known  as  "Concordantia,"  as  Boudinhon  in  Encyc.  Brit, 
article,  "Canon  Law,"  but  Heyer  has  shown  that  it  should  be  Concordia.  (2Jeit- 
schrift  der  Savigny-Stiftung  fur  Rechtsgeschichte,  v.  XXXIII,  Kanonistische 
Abteilung,  v.  II,  19 12,  pp.  336-342) 

On  the  date,  see  Paul  Foumier,  Deux  Controverses  sur  les  Origines  du  Decret 
de  Gratien-  Revue  d'histoire  et  de  litt^rature  religieuses.  III.  1898.  pp.  97-116, 
253-280. 

"Le  Dicret  de  Gratian  a  6t6  trhs  vraisemblablement  r6dig6  vers  1140,  ou 
tout  au  moins  k  une  6poque  plus  voisine  de  1140  que  de  1150."  p.  280. 


^ 


*y 


i 


•  '< 


EFFORTS  AFTER  CODIFICATION  43 

purpose.     It  was  bold  thus  to  name  it,  for  it  acknowledges  the 
lack  of  harmony  in  church  law,  and  emphasizes  the  need  of  com- 
pilation and  harmonizing.     His  method  is  the  usual  one  of  the 
period.    He  incorporates  bodily  texts  from  Scripture,  letters  and 
decrees  of  bishops  and  popes,  as  they  had  already  been  gathered 
by  his  predecessors,  groups  and  comments  on  them,  in  his  attempt 
to  harmonize  them.     If  they  appear  to  disagree,  one  may  be  of 
local  application  only,  the  other  of  general;  one  may  be  later  than 
another  and  a  progressive  development  in  church  law  may  be 
admitted;  and  if  these  methods  fail,  he  adopts  the  characteristic 
scholastic  method  of  arguing  that  the  meanings  of  words  may 
differ  at  different  times.    His  original  comments  are  incorporated 
between  the  quoted  texts,  and  known  as  the  "Dicta  Gratiani,"  the 
titles  of  which,  as  we  have  already  seen,  are  often  borrowed  from 
Alger  of  Liege. 

The  "Concordia"  or  "Decretum,"  as  it  was  soon  wrongly 
called,  became  the  manual  in  all  the  schools  and  universities  for 
canon  law,  as  Peter  Lombard's  "Sentences"  for  theology  'and 
was  glossed  and  commented  upon  by  Gratian's  pupils  and'  then 
by  other  famous  canonists  for  succeeding  centuries. 

Though  the  "Dicta"  often  evince  a  certain   freshness  of 
thought,  It  is  surprising  to  note  that  in  the  definition  of  sacra- 
ment,  Gratian  shows  little  or  no  originality.     He  quotes  the 
familiar  definitions  of  Augustine  and  Isidore,'  and  that  of  Ber- 
engar, that  "a  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace  "  * 
In  this  passage,  he  says  the  sacraments  are  baptism,  chrism,  the 
body  and  blood.^*    But  elsewhere,  he  speaks  of  the  "sacrament  of 
unction,"  ■•  and  he  uses  it  quite  vaguely  of  the  dedication  of  a 
church  of  the  giving  of  orders.'    The  "sacrifice  of  the  altar  is  the 
sacrament  of  unity."  ^ 


'  Decretum.  c.  84.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i. 
'  Ibid.  c.  32.  Dist.  II.  De  cons. 
» Ibid.  c.  84.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i. 
«Ibid.  c.  39.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i. 
» Ibid.  c.  106.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i. 
•  Ibid.  c.  63.  Dist.  II.  De  cons. 


~  r. 


1 


iUHMMki 


44 


PETER  LOMBARD 


Some  sacraments  are  of  dignity,  others  of  necessity.  Those 
that  are  necessary  to  salvation  cannot  be  repeated,  but  he  does 
not  state  what  these  are.^ 

The  sacraments  may  be  performed  even  by  unworthy  min- 
isters, '^because  the  divine  virtue  works  secretly  in  them,  and  this 
virtue  or  power  is  only  of  divine,  not  of  human  efficacy."  ^ 

"The  sacrifice,  moreover,  of  the  church  is  accomplished  in 
two,  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  of  the  sacrament,  that  is  the 
body  of  Christ.  There  is  therefore  the  sacrament,  and  the  thing 
of  the  sacrament,  that  is,  the  body  of  Christ."  •' 

"As  the  visible  sacrament  of  water  is  necessary  to  the  ablu- 
tion of  the  visible  body,  just  so  the  invisible  doctrine  of  faith  is 
necessary  to  the  sanctification  of  the  invisible  soul."  * 

We  have  seen  that  these  are  phrases  often  repeated  by  theo- 
logians for  centuries,  and  for  anything  new  on  the  subject  we 
must  turn  to  the  men  whom  Gratian  influenced. 

ROLAND  BANDINELLI   (d.   II81) 

An  example  of  the  doctors  of  this  period  who  were  interested 
both  in  canon  law  and  theology  was  Roland  Bandinelli.  In  canon 
law  he  wrote  a  commentary  on  Gratian's  "Decretum,"  the 
"Stroma"  or  "Sunima  Magistri  Rolandi,"  in  which  he  set  forth 
views  afterwards  contradicted  by  some  of  his  decisions  when  a 
few  years  later  he  was  Pope  Alexander  III.  In  theology  his  book 
of  "Sentences"  followed  very  largely  the  method  and  style  of 
Abelard's  "Theologia,"  which  we  must  discuss  more  fully  in 
another  connection.  His  intimate  knowledge  of  canon  law,  how- 
ever, made  him  much  less  dependent  on  Abelard  than  were  his 


"Ibid.  c.  39.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i.  VI.  Pars.  Sed  notandum  est,  quod  sacramen- 
torum  alia  sunt  dignitatis,  alia  necessitatis. 

2  Decretum.  c.  84.  Caus.  I.  Q.  i Quid  uirtus  diuina  secretius  opera- 

tur  in  eis,  et  diuinae  solummodo  est  hec  uirtus  sine  potestas,  non  humanae 
efficaciae. 

»  Decretum.  c.  48.  Dist.  II.  De  cons.  .  .  .  Conficitur  autem  sacrificium 
ecclesiae  duobus,  sacramento,  et  re  sacramenti,  id  est  corpore  Christi.  Est  igitur 
sacramentum,  et  res  sacramenti,  id  est  corpus  Christi. 

*  Decretum.  c  I.  Dist.  IV.  De  cons. 


> 


' 


i 


■t- 


T-* 


<- 


EFFORTS  AFTER  CODIFICATION  45 

contemporaries,  and  he  often  combats  Abelard's  views.^  Denifle 
argues  that  his  Sentences  were  written  between  1139  and  1141  or 
1 142,  and  so  before  the  work  of  Peter  Lombard.^ 

If  this  be  so,  it  is  striking  to  note  that  he  mentions  all  seven 
sacraments,  though  not  in  as  positive  and  settled  a  way  as  Peter 
does :  baptism,  confirmation,  the  sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood 
(in  which  he  treats  also  of  the  consecration  of  priests),  penance, 
unction  (in  connection  with  this,  the  sacerdotal  keys),  and  matri- 
mony.^ Denifle  thinks  his  "Sentences"  were  used  immediately  by 
his  contemporaries,  and  that  we  can  see  this  influence  in  the  Sen- 
tences of  Magister  Omnebene,  whose  work  also  was  built  up  on 
the  "Theology"  of  Abelard. 

'  P.  Heinrich  Denifle,  O.  P..  Die  Sentenzen  Abaelards  und  die  Bearbeitun- 
gen  seiner  Theologia  vor  Mitte  des  12.  Jhs.  in  Archiv  fur  Litteratur-  u.  Kirchen- 
geschichte  des  Mittelalters.  I.  p.  460. 

»  Denifle,  op.  cit.  pp.  438,  603-605,  611. 

P.  Fr.  Ambrosius  M.  Gietl,  O.  Pr.,  Die  Sentenzen  Rolands  nachmals  Papstes 
Alexander  III  Introd.  p.  XVII.  thinks  Roland's  work  comes  after  that  of  the 
Lombard,  but  his  arguments  do  not  seem  to  me  conclusive. 

*  Denifle,  op.  cit.  p.  460. 

Roland  Bandinelli— Sententiae,  edited  by  Gietl. 

Hie  videndum  est  de  clavibus  sacerdotalibus  ....  Cum  enim  recipit 
ordmem  sacerdotalem,  simul  et  has  claves  recipit. 


t    ^ 


CHAPTER  V 
Predecessors  of  the  Lombard 

BONIZO  of   PIACENZA 

Turning  now  to  the  doctors  who  devoted  themselves  entirely 
to  the  study  of  theology,  the  first  name  of  note  is  that  of  Bonizo, 
Bishop  of  Piacenza,^  who  wrote  a  short  book  on  the  sacraments 
in  which  he  divides  them  into  two  classes :  those  instituted  by  the 
Lord,  and  those  instituted  by  the  apostles.  Christ  instituted 
baptism,  which  was  necessary  to  salvation,  and  the  Eucharist. 
The  Eucharist  took  the  place  of  the  Passover,  the  "sacrament  of 
the  old  law,"  which  had  been  abolished  at  the  last  Supper,"  when 
Christ  said,  "With  desire  I  have  desired  to  eat  this  Passover  with 
you  before  I  suffer.  For  I  say  unto  you,  I  shall  not  eat  it,  until 
it  be  fulfilled  in  the  kingdom  of  God."  ^ 

"Now  I  come  to  the  sacraments  instituted  by  the  apostles. 
.  .  .  When  anyone  comes  to  be  catechized,  he  seeks  exsufiflation 
by  the  priest,  by  which  the  unclean  spirit  is  expelled ;  he  receives 
salt  at  the  hands  of  the  priest,  who  says :  Receive  the  salt  of  ims- 
dom,  which  is  profitable  for  you  to  life  eternal:  not  because  life 
eternal  is  given  to  the  catechumens,  but  because  salt  is  the  sacra- 
ment of  faith,  which  works  through  love  and  leads  those  baptized 
to  life  eternal."  * 

"Now  we  must  pass  to  the  sacrament  of  oil,  which  is  divided 
into  three  parts.     For  there  is  the  oil  of  chrism,  by  the  signing 

*  He  was  earlier  Bishop  of  Sutri,  which  see  he  lost  in  1082,  being  imprisoned 
by  the  Emperor  Henry  IV,  because  of  his  support  of  Gregory  VII.  He  escaped 
from  prison  in  1085  and  fled  to  Matilda,  Countess  of  Tuscany,  and  shortly  after- 
wards was  elected  bishop  of  Piacenza.  His  Libellus  de  Sacramentis  was  written 
after  his  elevation  to  this  see. 

*  Lib.  de  Sacram. 
» Lk.  22,  15. 

*  Libellus  de  Sacramentis. 

46 


< 


•i 


ii> 


\< 


-fi> 


'r' 


h 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD 


47 


with  which  the  seven-fold  grace  of  the  holy  Spirit  is  given.  And 
there  is  the  oil  of  exorcism,  by  which  catechumens  are  anointed 
for  the  casting  out  of  the  enemy.  And  there  is  the  oil  of  the 
sick  for  the  health  of  the  body  and  the  preparing  of  the 
soul.    ..."  * 

The  most  significant  point  to  note  in  this  passage,  in  the  light 
of  later  development,  is  the  ascription  of  only  two  sacraments, 
baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  to  Christ,  while  the  others  were  insti- 
tuted by  the  apostles.  This  was  the  common  view^  of  the  period, 
and  for  a  century  later,  as  for  instance  in  Peter  Lombard's  state- 
ment that  unction  was  ''instituted  by  the  apostles."  ^  But  the 
thirteenth-century  theologians,  on  the  contrary,  assumed,  that  all 
seven  were  instituted  by  Christ. 

ABELARD    (1079-II42) 

In  the  intellectual  movements  of  the  twelfth  century  the  com- 
manding figure  is  Master  Peter,  surnamed  Abelard,  born  at  Le 
Pallet  in  Brittany  about  the  year  1079,  of  noble  lineage.  Though 
the  eldest  son,  he  renounced  his  claims  and  the  possibility  of  a 
military  reputation,  saying,  *T  prefer  the  strife  of  disputation  to 
the  trophies  of  war." 

Of  his  numerous  books,  the  two  which  most  influenced  the 
men  whom  we  are  to  consider,  were  the  "Sic  et  Non"  and  the 
"Theologia,"  though  these  were  not  the  most  important  for  his 
theological  doctrines.  "The  "Theologia,"  because  of  its  plan, 
influenced  several  writers  of  books  of  Sentences,  but  the  "Sic  et 
Non"  had  a  more  striking  effect  on  the  period,  because  its  method 
created  so  much  controversy,  and  yet  despite  this,  many  contem- 
poraries, otherwise  conservative,  were  willing  to  learn  much 
from  it. 

The  method  of  the  "Sic  et  Non"  was  characteristic  of  the 
man.    Contradictory  opinions  of  the  Fathers  and  doctors  of  the 

Church  were  arranged  under  questions  which  were  designedly 

- 

1  Ibid. 

*  Lagarde,  The  Latin  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages.  p.  35. 

« Lib.  IV.  Dist.  XXIII.  c.  III.  ; 


«i 


/  Hi 


48 


PETER  LOMBARD 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD 


^ 


asked  in  such  a  way  as  to  suggest  rather  than  declare  his  doubt  as 
to  the  final  statement.  This  method  seemed  to  flaunt  an  attitude 
of  independence  toward  the  ancient  authorities,  but  Abelard  al- 
ways claimed  to  be  a  faithful  servant  of  the  Church.  It  was  in  the 
prologue  to  this  work  that  he  laid  down  a  defence  of  all  criticism 
— "By  doubting  we  are  led  to  inquire,  by  inquiry  we  perceive  the 
truth."  ' 

His  work  is  also  an  example  of  the  love  of  codification  char- 
acteristic of  that  age.  Unlike  Gratian  and  Peter  Lombard  he  did 
not  attempt  to  harmonize  the  opinions  of  church  teachers,  for  he 
declared  the  principle  that  "ecclesiastical  doctors  are  to  be  read 
not  with  the  necessity  of  believing,  but  with  the  liberty  of  judg- 
mg. 

In  two  other  ways  than  in  method  he  taught  contemporary 
writers.  He  was  superior  to  all  his  predecessors  in  the  gift  for 
orderly  arrangement,  and  this  bore  fruit  in  the  "Sentences"  of 
Roland  Bandinelli  and  Peter  Lombard.  Again,  his  collection  of 
patristic  materials,  though  much  of  it  was  taken  from  the  work 
of  his  predecessors  as  Alger  of  Liege,  yet  certainly  it  was  very 
largely  increased  from  his  own  wide  reading,  and  many  citations 
were  for  the  first  time  put  at  the  disposal  of  canonists  and  theo- 
logians. 

The  title  usually  given  to  Abelard's  book,  "Introduction  to 
Theology,"  is  wrong— it  should  have  been  simply  "Theology" 
which  was  to  be  an  introduction  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures. ^ 
Part  only  of  it  has  come  down  to  us,  but  some  of  it  may  be  infer- 
entially  recovered  from  four  books  of  Sentences  which  evidently 
follow  it  very  closely. 

These  four  books  of  Sentences  are  the  so-called  "Epitome," 
the  "Sentences"  of  a  St.  Florian  manuscript  discovered  by  Den- 
ifle,  those  of  Roland  Bandinelli  and  of  Magister  Omnebene.  It 
is  certainly  not  a  matter  of  chance  that  these  four  books  of 
Sentences  begin  with  the  words:  "There  are  three  things,  as  I 
judge,  in  which  the  sum  of  human  salvation  consists,  that  is, 

*  Sic  et  non  Prolog  e. 

*  Denifle,  op.  cit.  I.  p.  602. 


'! 


'<•  ■ 


49 


faith,  charity,  and  the  sacraments"  *— it  is  evident  that  this  was 
borrowed  from  the  "Theology"  of  Abelard.  No  other  book  out- 
side the  Abelardian  school  has  such  an  Incipit.^ 

Also  the  plan  of  these  four  books  was  the  same.  Each  fol- 
lows the  threefold  division  of  faith,  sacraments  and  charity. 
This  was  a  better  arrangement  than  the  four-fold  division  of 
Peter  Lombard.^ 

Abelard  quotes  Berengar's  definition — "But  a  sacrament  is 
the  visible  sign  of  the  invisible  grace  of  God,  just  as  when  any- 
one is  baptized,  the  exterior  ablution  of  the  body,  which  we  see, 
is  the  sign  of  the  interior  ablution  of  the  soul,  since  the  inner 
man  is  so  cleansed  from  sin,  as  the  outer  from  bodily  stains."  * 

The  "Epitome  of  Christian  Theology,"  often  attributed  to 
Abelard,  seems  to  be  the  first  book  we  have  that  was  influenced 
by  Abelard's  "Theology."  The  correct  title  is  the  "Sentences  of 
Master  Peter  Abelard,"  ^  but  it  is  really  by  a  follower  of  his. 
Its  author  also  quotes  "A  sacrament  is  the  visible  sign  of  invisible 
grace,"  ®  and  names  baptism,  confirmation  and  the  sacrament  of 
the  altar  as  "major  sacraments."  ^  These  major  sacraments  can- 
not be  repeated,  and  he  explains  concerning  the  Eucharist,  that 
"the  same  host  is  not  consecrated  twice."  ^  In  another  passage, 
however,  he  speaks  of  "the  sacrament  of  marriage,"  ^  and  in  the 
chapter  on  the  "sacrament  of  unction,"  he  adds  that  "a  Christian 
is  thrice  anointed,  first  when  a  baby,  that  is,  in  baptism,  where 
sins  are  remitted;  secondly  in  confirmation,  where  the  gifts  of 
grace  are  conferred;  thirdly  at  the  end  of  life,  where  either  all 
sins,  or  the  greatest  part,  are  blotted  out."  * 

*  Epitome,  c.  I. 

*  Denifle.  op.  cit.  p.  599. 

■  So  Denifle.  op.  cit.  p.  600.  Peter  Lombard's  division  was  probably  taken 
from  that  in  John  of  Damascus'  "The  Fountain  of  Knowledge"  and  derives  ori- 
ginally from  a  fanciful  reference  to  the  four  rivers  of  Paradise. 

*  Introductio  ad  Theologiam. 

•  Denifle.  op.  cit.  p.  591. 

•  Epitome,  c.  I. 

» Epitome,  c.  XXX. 
»  Epitome,  c.  XXXI. 

•  Ibid.  c.  XXX. 


50 


PETER  LOMBARD 


li  I 


These  four  books  of  Sentences — the  **Epitome,"  that  of  the 
St.  Florian  manuscript,  and  those  of  Roland  and  Omnebene — 
show  cleariy  the  direct  influence  of  Abelard's  teaching,  but  other 
writings  of  the  period  were  indirectly  affected  by  it,  and  to  these 
we  shall  come  presently. 

ROBERT  PULLUS   (c.    IO80-C.    II50) 

Another  influence  against  the  heretical  teaching  of  Abelard 
with  its  suggestions  of  new  possibilities,  was  the  work  of  Robert 
Pullus,  the  first  English  Cardinal.  He  was  educated  in  England, 
was  a  Master  at  Oxford,  and  Archdeacon  of  Rochester,  and  then 
about  113s  went  to  Paris,  and  a  few  years  later  to  Rome,  where 
he  was  made  Cardinal  and  Chancellor  of  the  Holy  Roman  Church. 
He  embodied  his  teaching  in  his  "Eight  Books  of  Sentences." 
"Sentences,"  of  course,  is  an  incorrect  translation  for  the  Latin 
"Sententiae,"  which  means  "opinions."  The  predecessors  of  the 
various  Books  of  Sentences  of  this  century  had  been  called 
"Flores"  or  "Excerpta"  and  only  occasionally  "Sententiae."  ^ 
His  range  of  subjects  is  wide,  but  his  book  lacks  orderly  arrange- 
ment, and  this  makes  it  very  hard  to  gather  what  his  conception 
of  sacrament  was.  In  the  fifth  book  he  treats  of  the  sacraments 
of  baptism^  and  of  confirmation,^  and  speaks  of  confession  as  our 
"second  refuge  after  shipwreck,"  *  baptism  being  the  first.  "The 
sacrament  offers  itself  to  the  eye,  the  thing  itself  is  traced  out  by 
the  mind.  A  sacrament  is  made  in  the  body,  but  the  virtue  of  the 
sacrament  in  the  mind."  ^  In  book  six,  he  discusses  Penance. 
"The  sacrament  however  of  binding  and  loosing  is  in  the  power  of 
the  vicars  of  God  themselves,  that  is,  the  priests  of  the  Church."  » 
He  also  calls  Penance  the  "sacrament  of  remission  and  absolu- 


*  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  24. 

On  Robert  Pullus,  see  the  Catholic  Encyclopaedia,  s.  v. 
linck,  op.  cit.,  passim. 

*  Sententiarum  Libri  Octo.  Lib.  V.  c.  XVI. 
=»  Ibid.  Lib.  V.  c.  XXII. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  V.  c.  XXX. 
» Ibid.  Lib.  V.  c.  XV. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  VI.  c.  LXI. 


See  also  de  Ghel- 


i. 


! 
1  • 


M-    '  -^ 


' 


> 


i 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD  51 

tion."  "Absolution  is  a  sacrament,  since  it  is  the  sign  of  a  sacred 
thing.  And  of  what  sacred  thing  is  it  the  sign,  unless  of  remis- 
sion and  absolution?"  ^ 

In  the  seventh  book  he  mentions  incidentally  the  "sacrament 
of  ordination"  which  must  not  be  repeated,  as  baptism  also  is  not 
to  be  repeated.^  He  speaks  somewhat  indefinitely  of  marriage  as 
a  sacrament,  but  speaks  of  the  three  good  things  in  marriage  as 
faith,  off-spring  and  sacrament.^  The  latter  part  of  this  he  takes 
from  St.  Augustine. 

In  the  last  book  he  discusses  the  "sacraments  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord,"  and  also  speaks  of  them  as  a  sacrifice.^ 

It  will  be  seen  from  these  citations  that  Robert  has  made  no 
distinctly  original  contributions  to  the  more  specific  definition  of 
sacrament.  He  is  for  the  greater  part  simply  repeating  phrases 
with  which  we  have  already  grown  familiar.  Yet  one  might  have 
expected  more  and  better  of  him,  for  other  subjects  in  his  tractates 
are  often  handled  with  force  and  not  seldom  with  originality. 
Other  phases  of  theological  thought  would  seem  to  have  better 
accorded  with  his  genius.  His  books  of  Sentences  enjoyed  much 
popularity  in  his  own  time,  but  were  speedily  excelled  in  public 
estimation  by  the  work  of  Peter  Lombard,  who  was  far  more 
skilful  in  the  statement  of  Scholastic  formularies  and  had  better 
success  in  meeting  the  wishes  of  the  church  authorities. 

HUGH  OF  ST.  VICTOR   (c.   IO78-II41) 

Once  more  in  the  history  of  Catholic  thought  there  appears 
a  commanding  personality,  a  man  of  varied  parts,  rich  alike  in 
powers  of  meditation,  in  gifts  of  teaching,  and  in  powers  of  ex- 
position. Hugh  of  St.  Victor  comes  to  the  problem  of  the  defi- 
nition of  sacrament  from  an  entirely  different  point  of  view: 
that  of  the  mystic.  "With  Hugh  the  material  creation  in  its 
deepest  verity  is  a  symbol;    .     .     .    Scripture,  besides  its  Hteral 

Ubid.  Lib.  VL  c.  LXL 

2  Ibid.  Lib.  vn.  c.  XIV. 

3  Ibid.  Lib.  VII.  c.  XXXIX. 
*  Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  cs.  I,  II. 


52 


PETER  LOMBARD 


I 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD 


53 


I'l 


meaning  is  allegory  from  Genesis  to  Revelation;  .  .  .  the 
means  of  salvation  provided  by  the  Church  are  sacramental,  and 
thus  essentially  symbolical."  ^ 

The  mysticism  inaugurated  by  Hugh  was  quite  evidently  a 
reaction  from  the  contentious  theology  of  Roscellin  and  Abelard. 
It  was  fortunate  for  the  new  dialectic,  that  Hugh,  who  was  emi- 
nently orthodox,  should  have  adopted  it,  for  it  would  otherwise 
have  been  condemned  because  of  its  connection  with  the  hetero- 
doxy of  Abelard. 

Hugh  is  important  in  the  development  of  the  definition  of 
sacrament,  for  he  begins  its  final  formulation,  gathering  the 
scattered  statements  of  Augustine  into  a  large  synthesis,  and  set- 
ting aside  the  Isidorean  definition.  Beyond  this,  his  own  origi- 
nality achieved  a  new  definition,  more  comprehensive  than  any 
preceding  one,  which  was  perfected  by  the  author  of  the  "Summa'' 
and  then  passed  into  general  acceptance  in  the  schools. 

Hugh,  whose  teaching  at  the  school  of  the  Abbey  of  St. 
Victor  in  Paris  was  so  important  for  the  development  of  Scho- 
lastic theology,  devotes  an  entire  treatise  to  the  discussion  of  the 
sacraments,  '*Of  the  Sacraments  of  the  Christian  Faith." 

"A  sacrament  is  a  corporeal  or  material  element  sensibly 
presented  from  without,  representing  from  its  likeness,  signifying 
from  its  institution,  and  containing  from  sanctification  some  invis- 
ible and  spiritual  grace. ^   .    .    . 

**Its  likeness  is  from  creation ;  its  institution  from  dispensa- 
tion ;  its  sanctification  from  benediction.  .  .  .  There  is  there- 
fore water  the  visible  sacrament,  and  invisible  grace,  the  thing 
(res)  or  virtue  of  the  sacrament.^   .    .    . 


*  H.  O.  Taylor,  The  Medieval  Mind.  II.  p.  90.  Inge  defines  his  system  as 
modifying  "uncompromising  Platonic  Realism  by  Aristotelian  science."  Chris- 
tian Mysticism,  p.  140. 

Cf.  also  Hamack,  History  of  Dogma  (Eng.).  vol.  VI.  p.  43. 

*  De  Sacramentis  Christianae  Fidei.  Lib.  I.  Pars  IX.  c.  2.  Sacramentum 
est  corporale  vel  materiale  elementimi  foris  sensibiliter  propositum  ex  similitudine 
repraesentans,  et  ex  institutione  significans,  et  ex  sanctificatione  continens  ali- 
quam  invisibilem  et  spiritualem  gratiam. 

» Ibid.  c.  2. 


t 


*'f r 


"Add  the  word  of  sanctification  to  the  element  and  there 
results  a  sacrament,  so  that  visible  water  may  be  a  sacrament 
representing  from  its  likeness,  signifying  from  its  institution,  con- 
taining from  its  sanctification,  spiritual  grace.  In  this  way  in 
other  sacraments  also  it  is  necessary  to  consider  these  three 
things."  ^ 

It  will  be  readily  seen  from  these  quotations  that  Hugh  has 
borrowed  much  from  the  theologians  who  preceded  him,  and 
especially  from  St.  Augustin,  but  the  material  is  synthesized  as  it 
has  not  been  before,  and  to  this  synthesis  Hugh  adds  original  dis- 
cussion of  his  own. 

His  three-fold  classification  of  sacraments  is  original.  "For 
there  are  some  sacraments  in  which  salvation  principally  consists 
and  is  received,  as  the  water  of  baptism,  and  the  receiving  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ.  There  are  others  which  even  if  they 
are  not  necessary  to  salvation  (because  salvation  can  be  had  with- 
out them)  yet  are  serviceable  for  sanctification,  because  by  them 
virtue  can  be  exercised  and  more  abundant  grace  acquired,  as  the 
water  of  sprinkling,  and  the  receiving  of  ashes,  and  the  like. 
There  are  again  other  sacraments  which  seem  to  be  instituted  for 
this  only,  that  through  them  those  things  which  are  necessary  for 
sanctifying  and  instituting  other  sacraments,  may  thus  be  pre- 
pared and  sanctified.^  .  .  .  The  first  therefore  are  founded  for 
salvation,  the  second  for  exercise,  the  third  for  preparation."  ^ 

In  another  passage  he  speaks  of  the  unction  of  the  sick  as  a 
sacrament,  which  was  instituted  by  the  Apostles.^  Marriage  is 
also  a  sacrament,  the  only  one  instituted  before  sin.^"^  He  devotes 
a  large  part  of  this  treatise  "Concerning  the  Sacraments"  to  a  dis- 
cussion of  Penance  and  the  remission  of  sins,  and  though  he  em- 
phasizes the  sacerdotalism  of  confession  and  penance  and  abso- 
lution, he  does  not  name  it  a  sacrament.'* 

*  Ibid.  c.  2. 

2  De  Sacram.  Lib.  I.  Pars  IX.  c.  VII. 
» Ibid.  Lib.  I.  Pars  IX.  c.  VII. 
<  Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Pars  XV. 

*  Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Pars  XL  c.  i. 

*  De  Sacram.  Lib.  II.  Pars  XIV. 


>     1 


/ 


MlMte'j''' 


I 


54 


PETER  LOMBARD 


Sacraments  may  consist  in  things,  in  acts,  or  in  words.  ^ 
The  Blessing  of  palms  on  Palm  Sunday  is  a  sacrament,  in  memory 
of  Christ's  entry  into  Jerusalem.  The  palm  is  the  sign  of  victory, 
branches,  of  good  vvorks.^  The  breathing  in  exorcism,  the  spread- 
ing out  of  the  hands,  bending  the  knees  are  all  sacraments  in 
acts.^  Others  are  in  words,  such  as  the  singing  of  the  Agnus  Dei 
in  the  Mass,  or  the  recital  of  the  creeds.  It  is  strange  that  he 
should  still  use  the  word  sacrament  in  such  vague  senses,  when  he 
had  so  limited  its  meaning  in  the  definitions  he  gave. 

Hugh  died  in  1141,  very  shortly  after  the  completion  of  this 
book,  but  the  fact  that  his  great  gift  had  been  as  a  lecturer  made 
possible  the  wide  dissemination  of  his  views  by  the  dispersal  of 
his  students,  and  accounts  for  the  incorporation  of  his  ideas  in 
later  treatises,  and  also  for  the  attributing  to  him  of  unauthentic 
books,  of  which  the  "Summa  Sententiarum"  deserves  considera- 
tion. 

Summa  Sententiarum 

This  "Summa,"  usually  attributed  to  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  is 
probably  not  his,  but  originates  with  some  member  of  his  schooL 
The  "Summa*'  was  certainly  written  later  than  the  "De  Sacra- 
mentis,''  upon  which  it  leaps,  while  its  doctrines  and  formulae 
give  evidence  of  progress.  Besides  this,  it  borrows  from  the 
school  of  Abelard  errors  and  formulae  which  Hugh  made  the 
objects  of  his  attacks.  The  close  examination  which  Pourrat  has 
given  it  supports  and  extends  these  arguments  by  showing  the 
differences  in  the  sacramental  teaching.* 


< 


y 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD 


55 


» Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Pars  IX.  c.  i. 
^  Ibid.  c.  4. 
^  Ibid.  c.  I. 

*  Catholic  Encyclopaedia,  •'Hugh  of  St.  Victor,"  by  Edward  Myers. 
Realencyklopadie— Hugo  von  St.  Victor,  by  Zockler. 
R.  Seeberg  (tr.  Hay)— History  of  Dogmas,  vol.  II.  pp.  62,  80. 
P.  Heinrich  Denifle.— Die  Sentenzen  Hugos  von  St.  Victor,  in  Archiv  fur 
Literatur-  und  Kirchengeschichte  des  Mittelalters.    Bd   III.  pp.  634  ff. 
Pourrat — La  th^logie  sacramentaire. 


^ 


h 


i' 


i) 


,i- 


The  "Summa"  contains  a  tractate  on  "Sacraments  in  Gen- 
eral" and  in  the  following  tractates  discusses  the  individual  sacra- 
ments. It  was  one  of  the  sources  on  which  Peter  Lombard  evi- 
dently depended  for  quite  a  considerable  amount  of  his  material. 
This  is  clearly  apparent  from  the  style. 

The  fourth  tractate  begins  the  discussion  of  sacrament.* 
"Against  sins  original  as  well  as  actual,  the  remedies  of  the  sacra- 
ments were  invented,  concerning  which  these  three  things  must  be 
considered:  what  a  sacrament  is,  why  instituted,  and  in  what 
(things)  it  consists.  Augustine:  A  sacrament  is  the  sign  of  a 
sacred  thing.  The  same :  A  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  invis- 
ible grace,2  just  as  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism  the  interior  ablu- 
tion is  figured  through  the  exterior  and  visible.  For  any  sacra- 
ment ought  to  have  the  likeness  of  that  thing  of  which  it  is  the 
sacrament.  Wherefore  Augustine :  For  if  the  sacraments  do  not 
have  the  likeness  of  those  things  of  which  they  are  sacraments, 
they  are  in  nowise  sacraments.  It  is  objected  that  the  aforesaid 
definition  is  not  applicable  to  sacraments  alone,  since  also  before 
sanctification  this  applies  to  water  so  that  it  is  the  visible  form  of 
invisible  grace,  just  as  the  stains  of  the  body  are  taken  away  by 
water,  so  the  stains  of  the  soul  through  grace.  But  that  it  may 
apply  to  sacraments  only,  it  must  be  understood  thus:  A  sacra- 
ment  is  the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace  gathered  in  it,  which 
the  sacrament  itself  confers.  For  it  is  not  only  the  sign  of  a 
sacred  thing,  but  also  its  efficacy.^  And  this  is  what  distinguishes 
between  sign  and  sacrament ;  because  for  this  that  it  be  a  sign  it 
does  not  require  anything  save  that  it  signify  that  of  which  it  is 
held  (to  be)  the  sign,  not  that  it  confer  it.  But  a  sacrament  not 
only  signifies,  but  also  confers  that  of  which  it  is  the  sign  or  sig^ 


*  Cf.  this  following  quotation  with  Peter  Lombard,  Lib.  Sent.  IV.  Dist.  i. 

*  As  noted  above,  this  was  wrongly  attributed  to  Augustine  by  Berengar, 
and  the  mistake  is  ever  afterwards  repeated. 

*  Summa  Sententiarum,  Tract  IV.  c.i.  Sacramentum  est  visibilis  forma, 
invisibilis  gratiae  in  eo  coUatae,  quam  scilicet  confert  ipsum  sacramentum. 
Non  enim  est  solummodo  sacrae  rei  signum,  sed  etiam  efficada. 


;  > 


iiiiiMiiii«iiii»Tiiiiait'f''T-'''ffl'--'"^  — r 


56 


PETER  LOMBARD 


nificalion.'  ...  A  sacrament  not  only  signifies  from  its  insti- 
tution, but  also  represents  from  its  likeness.^ 

However,  the  author  of  the  "Summa"  also  uses  it  in  the  old 
vague  way,  "When  sacred  things  or  mystic"  are  spoken  of  in  the 
sacred  Scriptures,  "as  the  sacrament  of  the  Incarnation."  ^ 

The  subsequent  tractates  in  the  "Sentences"  deal  with  Bap- 
tism, Confirmation,  the  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme  Unction  and 
Marriage  as  sacraments.*  Of  these  the  most  important  is  the 
treatment  of  penance,  for  the  author  saw  the  significance,  in 
this  connection,  of  emphasizing  that  power  of  the  keys  "which 
priests^  have,"  for  the  administration  of  that  sacrament  in  which 
the  ecclesiastical  discipline  could  be  maintained.  "These  keys 
are  discernment  and  power.  For  there  is  first  to  be  discerned 
who  are  bound,  who  loosed ;  and  afterwards  the  power  must  be 
used.  In  consecration,  through  the  ministry  of  the  bishop,  these 
keys  are  given  to  priests  alone.  But  it  does  not  seem  that  either 
priests  only  or  all  priests  have  these ;  because  many  before  ordina- 
tion know  who  are  bound  and  who  loosed,  many  after  consecra- 
tion lack  this  knowledge ;  and  so  not  all  priests  have  these  two."  * 
The  sacerdotal  keys,  then,  are  given  in  ordination,  by  a  bishop, 
but  ordination  is  not  distinctly  treated  as  a  sacrament.  This 
interest  in  the  power  of  the  keys  perhaps  shows  the  interest  of  a 
churchman  for  his  order. 

A  part  of  the  "Sentences"  has  come  down  to  us  as  the  "Theo- 
logical Tractate"  of  Hildebert  of  Lavardin,  Bishop  of  Mans  and 
later  Archbishop  of  Tours,  at  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century.^ 


"Ibid.  Sacramentum  vero  non  solum  significat,  sed  etiam  confert  illud 
cujus  est  signum  vel  significatio. 

2  Ibid.  Sacramentum  non  solum  ex  institutione  significat,  sed  etiam  ex 
similitudine  repraesentat. 

'  Ibid.  Quandoque  in  sacra  Scriptura  res  sacra  et  mystica,  sicut  sacra- 
mentum incarnationis. 

*  Ibid.  Tract.  V,  VI,  VII. 

See  discussion  of  Tract.  VII.  in  the  Realencyklopadie  article  cited  above, 
and  in  Denifle,  op.  cit. 

*  Ibid.  Tract.  VI.  c.  XIV. 

*  R.  Seeberg,  (tr.  Hay.)  History  of  Dogmas,  vol.  II.  p.  62. 


I 


\ 


PREDECESSORS  OF  THE  LOMBARD 


57 


# 


^, 


In  this  part  we  learn  that  "from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  both 
in  the  time  of  the  natural  law,  and  in  the  time  of  written  law,  there 
were  the  remedies  of  the  sacraments  against  sins  original  and 
actual."  ^ 

This  adequate  treatment  of  the  definition  of  sacrament  by 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor  and  his  follower,  the  author  of  the  "Summa," 
forms  the  climax  of  the  development  we  have  tried  to  trace,  and 
brings  us  to  Peter  Lombard,  who  is  able  to  enter  into  the  heritage 
of  many  generations  of  theologians  and  sum  up  their  work  in  the 
text-book  which  should  teach  the  whole  Church  for  centuries. 


*  Hildebert,  Tractatus  Theologicus.  c.  XL. 


f^ 


Kr 


K 


V-«f  '■■■-^' ' 


1  "■— » -■  T-'-ir'aiariiL....:-:.;.. 


CHAPTER  VI 
Peter  Lombard  and  His  Text-Book 

i.  introduction 

Manuals  which  gather  knowledge  or  opinion  and  present  it 
in  orderly  form  often  live  longer  and  sometimes  seem  to  exert  an 
influence  far  exceeding  the  works  of  original  genius.  Donatus 
wrote  in  his  "Ars  Grammatica"  the  rules  of  composition  devised 
by  many,  which  he  alone  collected  and  ordered  for  common  in- 
struction. He  had  deserved  fame  as  a  teacher,  to  whom  Jerome 
went  as  a  pupil,  but  the  "Ars  Grammatica"  became  the  school- 
book  of  the  Middle  Ages,  was  still  in  use  at  the  Reformation, 
while  its  author's  "name  became  a  common  metonymy  (in  the 
form  donet)  for  a  rudimentary  treatise  of  any  sort." 

Still  greater  has  been  the  vogue  of  Euclid,  who  in  the  third 
century  before  the  Christian  era  produced  his  "Elements"  which 
in  varied  forms  are  still  the  books  of  instruction  for  youth  in  the 
science  of  geometry. 

Similar  to  the  role  played  by  these  two  is  that  of  the  greatest 
theological  text-book  of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  whose  author  we 
have  at  last  come. 

2.      THE  LIFE  OF  PETER  THE  LOMBARD 

Peter  Lombard,  the  "Master  of  the  Sentences,"  was  born  in 
Lumello,  not  far  from  Novara,  (which  then  belonged  to  Lom- 
bardy),  probably  about  i  loo.  His  family,  both  poor  and  obscure, 
was  unable  to  educate  the  son  and  there  was  small  hope  for  a 
career  in  the  church  until  he  found  a  patron  in  the  Bishop  of 
Lucca,  who  sent  him  to  school  at  Bologna.  The  success  in  his 
studies  achieved  there  made  him  wish  to  go  to  France  and  in  this 


t: 


\ 


'V 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        59 

desire  again  his  patron  helped  him  with  a  letter  of  recommenda- 
tion to  St.  Bernard,  Abbot  of  Clairvaux.^ 

Bernard  at  first  placed  him  in  the  episcopal  school  at  Rheims, 
which  then  enjoyed  a  great  reputation,  under  the  headship  of 
Lotolf,2  where  he  remained  but  a  short  time.  Paris  was  really 
the  centre  of  the  intellectual  movement  of  the  day,  and  it  is  there- 
fore not  surprising  that  Peter  wished  to  go  thither.^ 

Bernard,  who  had  provided  for  his  needs  at  Rheims,  now 
wrote  recommending  him  to  Gilduin,  Abbot  of  St.  Victor,  for 
the  short  stay  which  he  intended  to  make  in  Paris.*  The  school  of 
St.  Victor  was  at  that  time  famous  for  its  learning.  It  was  to 
this  abbey  that  William  of  Champeaux  had  retired  in  1108,  and 
with  him  had  come  many  of  his  pupils.  William  was  made  Bishop 
of  Chalons  in  11 13,  but  his  successor  Gilduin,  elected  abbot  the 
following  year,^  maintained  the  tradition  of  piety  and  learning, 
and  to  the  school  came  students  from  all  over  Europe,  of  whom 
perhaps  the  most  famous  was  Hugh  of  Blankenburg,  better 
known  as  Hugh  of  St.  Victor. 

The  Lombard  probably  came  to  Paris  before  11 39,  just  as 
Abelard  had  resumed  his  career  as  a  teacher  there.  Probably 
Peter  Lombard  heard  his  lectures,^  at  least  he  read  his  books,  for 
John  of  Cornwall  tells  us  that  "he  frequently  had  his  book  in  his 
hands."  ^  He  also  studied  Gratian's  "Decretum,"  which  had  just 
been  finished.  And  it  was  precisely  these  two  influences,  Abe- 
lard and  Gratian,  which  most  conditioned  his  later  method  of 
exposition. 

*  F.  Protois,  Pierre  Lombard,  Eveque  de  Paris,  son  fipoque,  sa  vie,  ses 
Merits,  son  influence,  pp.  27-29.  Catholic  Encyclopaedia,  Peter  Lombard.  En- 
cyclopaedia Britannica,  Peter  Lombard.  Realencyklopadie,  Petrus  Lombar- 
dus.  J.  de  Ghellinck,  S.  J.,  Le  Mouvement  th^logique  du  Xlle  si^le.  pp. 
126-130. 

*  Protois,  op.  cit.  p.  30.    de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  126. 
»  Protois,  op.  cit.  p.  31.    de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  127. 

*  Ep.  160.    Protois,  op.  cit.  pp.  31-32.    de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  127. 
•Protois,  op.  cit.  p.  33. 

•de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  126-127. 

'  Frequenter  prae  manibus  habebat.  Eulogium  ad  Alexandnmi  III.  c.  III. 
(MSL  199,  1052.) 


/ 


6o 


PETER  LOMBARD 


He  soon  gained  the  chair  of  Theology  at  the  Cathedral 
School  of  Notre-Dame,^  which  he  filled  for  many  years,  and  in 
which  he  won  great  and  enduring  repute.  By  1 142,  his  Commen- 
tary on  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  had  become  known.  In  1 148  he 
was  at  Rheims  with  Robert  of  Melun,  and  joined  Adam  du  Petit- 
Pont  and  Hugh  of  Reading  as  opponents  of  Gilbert  de  la  Porree 
in  theological  discussions.  He  is  already  well  enough  known  to 
be  consulted  by  Pope  Eugene  ni,^  and  no  greater  evidence  of  the 
regard  in  which  he  was  now  held  could  be  found. 

Some  time  during  the  years  1 148-1 150  he  was  at  Rome,  prob- 
ably on  account  of  the  troubles  arising  in  the  Paris  schools.^ 
While  there  he  became  acquainted  with  the  work  of  John  of  Da- 
mascus, "The  Fountain  of  Knowledge,"  which  had  just  been 
translated  by  Burgundio  of  Pisa.  This  again  shows  us  his  interest 
in  the  latest  publications.  His  own  fertility  of  mind  was  matched 
with  a  desire  to  know  the  thoughts  of  others. 

At  the  beginning  of  1152,  when  his  successful  teaching  at 
Paris  had  made  his  reputation,  and  when  his  "Libri  Sententi- 
arum"  had  just  been  finished,  a  bull  of  Eugene  HI  gave  him  a 
prebend  in  the  diocese  of  Beauvais,*  again  on  the  recommenda- 
tion of  Bernard  of  Clairvaux. 

His  teaching  had  been  opposed  in  some  points  by  Robert  of 
Melun  and  Maurice  de  Sully,^  but  Peter  endeavored  always  to 
keep  it  orthodox,  though  taking  account  of  all  the  opinions  of  the 
day.  He  was  always  circumspect,  always  deferential  to  authority, 
and  a  friend  of  peace.  His  instruction,  despite  this  opposition, 
was  successful,  and  his  pupils,  realizing  the  merit  of  his  lectures, 
begged  him  to  publish  them.  To  this  request,  we  owe  the  cele- 
brated Books  of  Sentences.* 

In  1 1 59,  the  bishopric  of  Paris  was  vacant  by  the  death  of 


»  Protois,  op.  cit.  pp.  34-39- 

«  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  127-128.    Protois,  op.  cit.  p.  35- 

»de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  127,  1 73-1 74- 

<de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  128. 

» Ibid. 

•Protois,  op.  cit.  pp.  39"4i- 


^ 


I 


-^\ 


I 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        61 

Thibaut.  Philip  of  France,  fourth  brother  of  King  Louis  VH, 
and  Arch'leacon  of  Paris,  was  elected  to  succeed  him.  He  de- 
clined, but  advised  the  canons  to  elect  Peter  Lombard,  whose 
pupil  he  had  been,  and  whose  talents  and  services  fitted  him  for 
this  dignity.  Later  in  the  century,  Walter  of  St.  Victor  accused 
him  of  gaining  the  election  by  simony,^  but  there  seems  to  have 
been  no  just  ground  for  this  accusation.^ 

In  July,  1 160,  Peter  was  succeeded  in  the  bishopric  by 
Maurice  de  Sully,  a  Master  in  Theology,  and  the  builder  of  the 
present  Cathedral  of  Notre-Dame.  Peter  died  some  time  after^ : 
the  date  is  not  known,  but  it  cannot  have  been  later  than  1 164."*  In 
the  cartulary  of  Paris  we  find  his  name  mentioned  a  couple  of 
times.  The  house  in  which  he  had  lived  was  given  to  the  Church 
of  Paris,  and  Stephen  Langton,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  pre- 
sented the  original  manuscript  of  the  Sentences  to  the  Cathedral 
Library,  for  the  benefit  of  poor  students.^  It  is  most  surprising 
that  a  man  whose  book  has  been  so  widely  known,  should  be 
mentioned  so  seldom  by  contemporary  historians. 

3.     THE  Lombard's  earlier  works 

From  the  earlier  period  of  Peter  Lombard's  life  three  works 
have  come  down  to  us :  the  Commentary  on  the  Psalms  of  David, 
the  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  his  Sermons. 

For  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  the  Middle  Ages  had  a  num- 
ber of  collections  of  the  comments  of  the  Fathers  on  the  several 


*  Episcopus  licet  simoniace  intrusus  in  ecclesia.  Excerpta  ex  Libris.  Ex 
Hb.  IL 

*  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  128-129.    Protois,  op.  cit.  p.  46. 
'  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  129-130. 

*  He  was  buried  in  the  church  of  St.  Marcellus,  near  Paris.  His  epitaph 
reads:  Hie  iacet  Magister  Petrus  Lombardus,  Parisiis  episcopus,  qui  composuit 
librum  Sententiarum,  glossas  psalmorum  et  apostolorum,  cuius  obitus  dies  est 
XIII  Kal.  Augusti. 

The  recumbent  effigy  on  the  tomb  is  evidently  from  the  century  following, 
for  the  episcopal  mitre  is  not  correct  for  the  Lombard's  date.    Protois,  op.  dt. 

p.  54. 

*  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  p.  129,  and  n.  3. 


f 


"\ 


62 


PETER  LOMBARD 


books  of  the  Bible.  In  the  Lombard's  time  the  most  celebrated 
was  that  of  Walafrid  Strabo,  known  as  the  Glossa  ordinaria, 
written  in  the  ninth  century.  At  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth 
century  Anselm  of  Laon  added  new  notes  to  this,  l)etween  the 
lines,  and  his  work  was  known  as  the  Glossa  interlinearis.  Peter 
Lombard  simply  used  this  Glossa  and  composed  his  commentary 
almost  entirely  of  citations  from  Augustine,  Cassiodorus,  the 
Glossa  of  Alcuin,  Rabanus  Maurus  and  others,  which  were 
included  in  the  Glossa.  Following  their  example,  he  does  not 
entirely  give  up  the  literal  sense  of  the  passage,  but  always  inclines 
rather  to  the  spiritual  and  mystical  interpretation.^ 

His  commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles  was  written  about 
1140.  Like  that  on  the  Psalms  it  is  hardly  more  than  a  compila- 
tion of  extracts  from  the  writings  of  Ambrose,  Hilary,  Jerome, 
Augustine,  Cassiodorus  and  Remi  of  Auxerre.^ 

The  Lombard's  sermons  are  very  hard  to  date.  Some  are 
probably  from  the  time  of  his  episcopate,  others  certainly  seem 
to  be  from  the  period  of  his  residence  with  the  canons  of  St. 
Victor.  Their  pulpit  was  famous,  and  Peter  must  also  have 
preached  there.  The  sermons  are  still  unpublished.  Some  of  his 
sermons  are  said  to  be  inferior  in  style  to  that  of  the  Books  of 
Sentences  and  would  therefore  lead  us  to  believe  that  they  were 
from  an  earlier  period.  Some  also  show  quite  strikingly  the  influ- 
ence of  the  strong  mysticism  of  St.  Victor.^ 


4. 


THE  ''four  books  OF  SENTENCES*' 


The  book  on  which  Peter  Lombard's  fame  rests,  and  from 
which  he  gained  his  title  of  "Master  of  the  Sentences"  was  the 
"Libri  Quatuor  Sententiarum."  This  was  probably  written  about 
1 150:  this  date  seems  to  fit  in  best  with  the  few  facts  that  we 
know  about  his  life,  and  with  his  use  of  Gratian's  "Decretum" 
and  John  of  Damascus'  "Fountain  of  Knowledge,"  which  Peter 


*  Protois,  op.  cit.  pp.  120-123. 
^Protois,  op.  dt.  pp.  123-149. 


t ' , 


^  >- 

I 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        63 

himself  tells  us  had  been  translated  by  order  of  Pope  Eugene 
HI/  from  the  Greek  into  Latin.^ 

In  the  Prologue  to  the  "Sentences,"  Peter  Lombard  declares 
that  he  has  gathered  the  opinions  of  the  Fathers  into  one  volume, 
that  the  student  may  be  saved  the  handling  of  a  number  of 
books.  He  makes  no  pretence  to  originality.  The  Middle  Age 
was  a  period  of  codification  in  all  branches  of  knowledge,  and  the 
Lombard  follows  a  long  line  of  canonists  and  theologians  who  had 
devoted  themselves  to  gathering  and  codifying  the  opinions  of  the 
Fathers  and  Doctors  of  the  Church  on  questions  of  doctrine.  In 
the  first  half  of  the  twelfth  century,  this  parallel  development  of 
Canon  Law  and  Theology  was  summed  up  in  two  great  text- 
books, Gratian's  "Decretum"  or  "Concordia  Discordantium  Can- 
onum"  and  Peter  Lombard's  "Libri  Quatuor  Sententiarum." 
The  legend  that  made  Peter  and  Gratian  brothers  is  untrue,^  but 
it  is  at  least  an  interesting  expression  of  the  comparison  that  the 
Middle  Ages  always  drew  between  their  two  books. 

Up  to  the  twelfth  century  there  had  been  no  text-book  for  the 
study  of  theology.  It  is  certainly  interesting,  then,  to  see  how  the 
Lombard  systematized  the  theological  teaching  of  the  Middle 
Ages  into  a  compendium  which  became  the  basis  of  the  instruction 
in  the  schools  and  universities  for  centuries,  and  the  starting- 
point  for  the  work  of  all  Catholic  theologians. 

In  this  task,  Peter  Lombard  owed  much  to  the  work  of  his 
predecessors,  and  especially  to  the  books  of  his  contemporaries, 
which  appeared  a  few  years  before  his  own.  There  are  only 
about  ten  lines  in  the  whole  book  for  which  no  source  can  be 
found. 

Abelard  had  already  led  the  way  in  the  systematizing  of 
theology  by  his  "Theologia,"  and  we  can  see  the  widespread  influ- 
ence of  this  in  several  books :  the  "Sentences  of  Peter  Abelard," 


*I.  19,  13. 

2  R.  Seeberg,  History  of  Dogma  (tr.  Hay)  pp.  62-63. 

de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  127,  130-131. 

« de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  122-126,  277-346. 


\\\ 


f'Mgfirr' 


64 


PETER  LOMBARD 


*        . 


or  the  "Epitome."  as  it  is  usually  erroneously  called,  a  collection 
of  Abelard's  opinions  made  by  some  of  his  pupils,  the  "Sentences** 
of  Roland  Bandinelli,  later  Pope  Alexander  III,  of  Omnebene, 
and  most  important  of  all,  those  of  Peter  Lombard.^ 

For  his  method,  the  Lombard  was  more  dependent  on  the 
model  of  Al^elard's  "Sic  et  Non"  :  ^  the  gathering  of  "authorities*' 
in  a  systematic,  methodical  way,  for  and  against  a  doctrine.  But 
unlike  Abelard,  he  makes  some  attempt  at  reconciling  the  differ- 
ences between  his  authorities,  by  subtle  distinctions  and  clever 
inferences.^  Peter  states  the  proposition,  quotes  the  authorities 
on  the  subject,  which  are  often  quite  contradictory,  and  ends  with 
a  few  words  which  show  the  true  conclusion,  as  he  sees  it.  He  is 
always  timid,  always  modest,  and  some  of  his  conclusions  are 
intentionally  stated  quite  vaguely.*  His  humility  and  modesty 
are  summed  up  admirably  in  the  rather  discouraged  words  at  the 
end  of  one  distinction,  "H  anyone  can  explain  this  better,  I  am 
not  envious.**  ^ 

In  the  arrangement  of  his  book  he  does  not  follow  Abe- 
lard's "Theologia."  That  was  divided  under  the  headings  Faith, 
Charity  and  Sacrament.  Peter  Lombard's  division  into  four  books 
was  perhaps  taken  from  John  of  Damascus'  "Fountain  of  Knowl- 
edge," which  he  followed  quite  closely  in  the  first  three  books.  In 
the  Prologue  he  says  that  he  will  divide  the  books  into  chapters 
with  titles,  so  that  "what  is  sought  may  be  found  more  easily.** 
In  this  arrangement  he  was  influenced  by  the  Decretum.^  Later, 
in  the  next  century,  it  was  divided  into  "Distinctions.**  ^ 


*  P.  Heinrich  Denifle,  O.  P.,  Die  Sentenzen  Abaelards  und  die  Bearbeitungen 
seiner  Theologia  vor  Mitte  des  12.  Jhs.  Archiv  fur  Litteratur-  u.  Kirchengeschichte 
des  MitteUdters.    pp.  402-469,  and  584-624. 

'^  See  above, 

*  de  Ghellinck,  op.  cit.  pp.  130-148. 

*de  Ghellinck — ^The  Liber  Sententiarum.  Dublin  Review,  CXLVI.  Jan. 
1910.  p.  157. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Dist.  V.  3. 

*  Paul  Foumier,  Deux  controverses  sur  les  origines  du  D^ret  de  Gratien. 
p.  114,  and  note  2.    Revue  d'Histoire  et  de  Litt^rature  religieuses.  IIL  1898. 

'  de  Ghellinck,  Le  Traite  de  Pierre  Lombard  sur  les  sept  ordres  eccldsias- 
tiques.    Revue  d'histoire  ecclesiastique  X.  1909.  p.  722.  n.  i. 


»f 


*m, 


^ 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        65 

The  patristic  authorities,  which  the  Lombard  cites  in  defence 
of  every  point  in  his  arguments,  he  found  mostly  in  the  "Sic  et 
Non'*  and  in  Gratian's  "Decretum.*'  It  is  probable  that  the 
gathering  of  many  of  the  quotations  from  the  Fathers  in  the  "Sic 
et  Non*'  was  the  fruit  of  Abelard's  own  reading,  but  certainly 
there  were  others  in  that  period  who  were  working  at  the  same 
task.^  Alger  of  Liege  had  also  put  together  texts  from  patristic 
writings  in  his  "Sentences,"  which  were  an  aid  to  Peter  Lom- 
bard's work,  and  some  of  which  were  incorporated  in  Gratian's 
"Decretum." 

The  frequently  repeated  phrase,  "We  are  often  asked"  shows 
that  Peter  was  considering  all  the  questions  and  opinions  of  his 
age  on  the  points  in  question  and  attempting  to  harmonize  them. 
On  the  whole,  he  succeeds  in  remaining  rigorously  orthodox,  but 
there  was  opposition  to  some  of  his  views  during  his  life-time  and 
after.  The  Third  Council  of  the  Lateran  in  1 179,  however,  beg^n 
one  canon  with  "We  believe  with  Peter  Lombard."  ^  In  the  thir- 
teenth century  the  Masters  of  Paris  condemned  several  proposi- 
tions, which  have  since  then  been  published  at  the  end  of  the 
book.^  The  Lombard's  rather  vaguely-stated  conclusions  were 
an  advantage  to  the  book  when  used  as  a  text  in  the  schools,  for 
it  encouraged  questions  and  comments  on  it  by  both  masters  and 
Students. 

The  first  book  of  the  "Sentences"  discusses  the  Trinity,  the 
sacond  the  Creation  and  the  Fall,  the  third  the  Incarnation,  and 
the  last  the  Sacraments  and  Eschatology.  It  is  of  course  his  dis- 
cussion of  sacraments  which  here  concerns  us. 

Here  much  work  had  already  been  done  by  the  theologians 
of  the  period,  and  Peter  entered  into  their  labors.     In  his  "Sen- 


*  de  Ghellinck,  The  Liber  Sententiarum.    Dublin  Review.  Jan.  1910.  p.  149. 

de  Ghellinck,  Le  Traits  de  Pierre  Lombard  sur  les  sept  ordres  eccl6sias- 
tiques:  ses  sources,  ses  copistes.    Revue  d'histoire  ecclesiastique.  X.  1909.  p.  301. 

2  Cap.  IL  2  (Mansi,  v.  XXIL  p.  983. 

3  de  Ghellinck,  Le  Mouvement  th^ologique  du  Xlle  Siecle,  p.  163. 


I 


66 


PETER  LOMBARD 


tences"  Robert  Pullus,  the  first  English  Cardinal,  had  given  four 
of  his  eight  books  to  a  discussion  of  the  sacraments,  but  his  work 
was  not  systematically  arranged,  and  a  very  slight  comparison 
with  Peter's  shows  what  an  advance  the  latter  had  made.  His 
advance,  however,  was  only  possible  by  the  help  of  the  Cardinal's 
work. 

In  the  "Theologia"  of  Abelard,  as  in  the  books  of  Sentences 
by  his  followers,  the  sacraments  had  been  discussed  at  length.  In 
the  "Sic  et  Non,"  too,  questions  relating  to  the  sacraments  had 
been  raised,  and  both  these*  had  a  marked  influence  on  Peter's 
fourth  book. 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor's  last  work  before  his  death  in  1 141  was 
the  "De  Sacramentis  Fidei."  Much  of  this  had  been  taken  over 
word  for  word  by  the  "Summa  Sententiarum"  which  quite  cer- 
tainly is  not  by  Hugh,  but  comes  from  his  school.  Originally,  it 
had  no  tractates  on  the  Last  Things,  on  Orders  or  on  Marriage. 
The  tractate  on  Orders  was  taken  from  Ivo  of  Chartres.  that  on 
Marriage  from  Walter  of  Mortagne,^  but  these  had  been  added 
to  the  other  tractates  before  the  Lombard's  study  of  the  book,  for 
he  made  use  of  them  both. 

Fournier  has  made  it  certain  that  Gratian's  "Decretum"  was 
written  before  Peter  Lombard's  "Sentences,"  ^  and  it  is  then  quite 
clear  that  it  was  one  of  the  sources  for  Peter's  discussion  of  the 
sacraments.  From  the  "Decretum"  and  from  Abelard's  "Sic  et 
Non"  Peter  took  the  citations  from  patristic  literature  as  "author- 
ities" for  his  argument. 

The  Lombard  transcribes  literally  passages  from  Hugh's  "De 
Sacramentis"  or  from  the  "Summa"  and  adds  citations  of  author- 
ities which  he  took  from  Gratian.  To-day,  such  methods  would 
lay  him  open  immediately  to  the  charge  of  plagiarism,  but  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  this  was  a  correct  literary  method.  Passages  from 
the  Fathers  are  given  under  their  own  names,  at  least  to  the  best 


*  de  Ghellinck — The  Liber  Sententianim.  pp.  144-155. 

*  de  Ghellinck — The  Liber  Sententianim.  p.  153. 

"  Paul  Fournier,  Deux  controverses  sur  les  engines  du  D6cret  de  Gratien. 
Revue  d'Histoire  et  de  Litt^rature  religieuses.  IIL  1898.  pp.  97-116,  253-280. 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        67 


'-? 


> 


of  his  knowledge  of  them,  but  those  from  works  of  his  contem- 
poraries quite  anonymously.^ 

A  few  examples  will  make  his  method  clearer.  For  his  treat- 
ment of  baptism,  the  Lombard  is  indebted  to  the  "Summa,**  and 
to  this  he  adds  patristic  quotations  from  the  "Decretum."  ^  For 
confirmation,  he  follows  Hugh's  "De  Sacramentis."  ^ 

The  "Summa  Sententiarum'*  is  the  basis  for  the  Lombard's 
teaching  on  the  Eucharist.  Some  of  it  is  taken  word  for  word, 
other  parts  are  changed  about,  and  citations  and  discussion  added 
from  Gratian.  To  Abelard  he  owes  the  statement  that  the  Eu- 
charist is  a  memorial,*  but  he  refers  to  the  institution  as  an  his^ 
torical  event,  only  to  show  why  it  should  be  received  fasting.  On 
the  Eucharist,  the  Summa  is  in  agreement  with  Abelard,  so  that 
the  Lombard  does  not  need  to  consider  Abelard's  views  also.** 
Peter  Lombard  is  evidently  familiar  with  the  contemporary  writ- 
ings on  the  Eucharist,  probably  with  that  of  Alger  of  Liege, 
and  possibly  with  the  work  of  Rupert  of  Deutz.*  The  problem 
was  already  settled — the  Berengarian  controversy  at  the  end  of^ 
the  eleventh  century  had  completed  the  crystallization  of  the 
doctrine,  and  the  Lombard  had  only  to  state  the  accepted  view.^ 

In  the  discussion  of  penance  and  confession,  however,  Peter 
Lombard  is  obliged  to  unite  several  lines  of  development.  There 
is  still  the  ancient  practice  of  penance  which  he  finds  in  the  quota- 
tions from  the  Fathers  cited  by  Gratian,  the  newer  conception  of 
penance  and  confession  as  a  sacrament,  and  the  power  of  the 


^  de  Ghellinck — Le  Mouvement  th^logique.  pp.  141-148. 

*  Otto  Baltzer,  Die  Sentenzen  des  Petrus  Lombardus.  Ihre  Quellen  und  ihre 
dogmengeschichtliche  Bedeutung.  Studien  zur  Geschichte  der  Theologie  luid 
der  Kirche.    Bd.  VIH.  Heft.  3.  1902.  pp.  124-128. 

*  Ibid.  pp.  128-129. 

*  Dist.  VIH.  3. 

*  Ibid.  pp.  129-135. 

*  Died  at  Deutz,  now  part  of  Cologne,  March  4,  1 135.  In  mi  he  wrote 
his  twelve  books,  De  divinis  officiis.  He  was  a  Platonizing  mystic  whose  Euchar- 
istic  doctrine  was  the  subject  of  a  long  dispute  by  the  Maurists  and  by  Bel- 
larmine,  in  which  his  orthodoxy  was  alternately  attacked  and  defended. 

'  Ibid.  pp.  129-135. 


\ 


68 


PETER  LOMBARD 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK   69 


It 

m 


ill 


keys.^  On  the  conception  of  penance  as  a  sacrament  the  Lom- 
bard is  still  rather  hesitant,  but  on  the  other  points  his  develop- 
ment is  clear.  In  his  treatment  he  again  is  influenced  by  Hugh 
of  St.  Victor,  by  the  "Summa  Sententiarum,"  but  especially  by 
Gratian,  who  in  his  "Decretum"  devotes  the  long  "Tractatus  de 
Poenitentia"  to  the  subject.  Abelard,  in  this  case,  influences  him 
indirectly  through  Gratian.^ 

The  treatment  of  Extreme  Unction  follows  the  "Summa 
Sententiarum"  and  Hugh  of  St.  Victor's  "De  Sacramentis,'*  rear- 
ranged and  combined  with  each  other. ^  On  the  question  of  the 
repetition  of  the  sacrament,  he  decides  according  to  the  practice 
of  the  day,  which  allowed  it.* 

There  is  only  vague  conception  of  ordination  as  a  sacrament 
before  Peter  Lombard's  "Sentences,"  though  St.  Augustine  men- 
tions it  as  a  sacrament.^  In  his  "De  Sacramentis,"  Hugh  speaks 
vaguely  of  ordination  among  the  sacraments  which  prepare  for 
others.  The  "Epitome"  does  not  mention  it  as  a  sacrament,  and 
the  "Summa"  says  in  the  chapter  on  the  "Two  Keys"  that  these 
are  given  to  priests  only,  in  the  consecration  by  a  bishop.  The 
Lombard  names  it  in  the  list  of  sacraments,  but  beyond  that  speaks 
of  it  as  a  sacrament,  only  because  it  is  the  "sign"  of  the  grace 
given  to  the  clergy.®  The  rest  of  his  treatment  is  devoted  to  a 
discussion  of  the  seven  orders,  in  which  one  finds  with  difficulty 
five  lines  that  are  original  with  him.  From  Gratian  he  took  the 
canons  relative  to  functions,  from  Hugh  the  example  of  Christ 
in  fulfilling  each  of  these  orders,  from  Ivo  of  Chartres  the  cere- 
monies of  ordination,  and  from  Gratian  the  materials  for  the  dis- 
cussion of  ordination  by  heretics  and  simonists.  In  describing 
the  ceremony  of  ordination,  he  forgot  the  laying-on  of  hands.* 

*  Ibid.  p.  135. 

*  Ibid.  pp.  135-147- 
» Ibid.  pp.  147-148. 

*  Ibid.  p.  148. 

*  Contra  Epistolam  Parmeniani.  II.  c.  XIII.  28. 

•One  of  Augustine's  definitions:  a  sacrament  is  a  "sacred  sign."     De  Civ. 
X.  c.  5. 

'  Ibid.  pp.  148-151. 


fm. 


\4 


1 


Ivo  of  Chartres'  sermon,  "Liber  de  sacris  Ordinibus"  seems  to 
have  come  to  Peter  Lombard  indirectly  through  the  "Sentences" 
of  Alger  of  Liege. ^  Isidore  of  Seville  and  Ivo  of  Chartres  were 
also  sources  for  Hugh's  treatment  of  the  seven  orders,  in  a  pas- 
sage which  lacks  the  originality  of  other  parts  of  his  work.^ 

In  the  Distinctions  on  Matrimony,  Peter  Lombard  at  first 
depends  on  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  but  soon  turns  to  the  Canon  Law- 
side  of  the  question,  which  he  finds  in  Gratian.  The  sacramental 
significance  of  marriage,  as  a  "sign  of  a  sacred  thing,"  the  union 
of  Christ  and  the  Church,  he  finds  in  Hugh's  treatise  on  the 
Sacraments.^ 

This  is  necessarily  a  mere  sketch  of  the  sources  from  which 
Peter  Lombard  gleaned  his  Distinctions  on  the  sacraments,  but  it 
shows  us  quite  clearly  that  his  originality  consists  only  in  the  suc- 
cessful compilation  of  materials  ready  to  hand  into  a  text-book 
useful  for  the  Schools. 

5.     THE  Lombard's  definition  of  sacrament 

We  have  already  traced  the  history  of  the  many  attempts  to 
define  the  conception  of  sacrament.  Peter  Lombard  stands  at 
the  end  of  this  long  development,  summing  up  the  work  of  pre- 
ceding theologians,  and  giving  his  own  definition,  which  with 
only  slight  changes  in  the  wording  was  to  be  accepted  for  cen- 
turies. 

But  even  with  this  long  development  behind  him,  he  works 
slowly  and  cautiously  at  his  definition.^  He  starts  with  the  defini- 
tion of  Augustine — "A  sacrament  is  the  sign  of  a  sacred  thing."  ^ 
To  this  he  adds  the  definition  of  Berengar,  attributed  to  St. 
Augustine — "A  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace."  ^ 


1  de  Ghellinck,  Le  Traits  de  Pierre  Lombard  sur  les  sept  ordres  eccl&ias- 
tiques.    Revue  d'histoire  ecclfeiastique.  X.  1909.  p.  302. 

*  Ibid.  pp.  290-302,  720-726.    voL  XI.  1910.  pp.  29-46. 
'  Baltzer,  op.  cit.  pp.  I5i-i59- 

« Lib.  IV.  Dist.  I. 

•August.  X.  de  Civ.  Dei.  c.  5  and  II  contra  Adversar.  Legis  et  Prophet. 

c.  9.  n.  34. 

•  Berengar,  De  Sacra  Coena  (ed.  A.  F.  and  F.  Th.  Vischer.)  p.  114. 


\ 


I, 
M 

If 


70 


PETER  LOMBARD 


TnH 

m 


Some  signs,  he  continues,  are  natural,  as  smoke  signifying  fire, 
others  conventional.  And  of  these  conventional  signs  some  are 
sacraments,  some  not.  For  every  sacrament  is  a  sign,  but  not 
conversely.  Like  Augustine,  he  insists  that  a  sacrament  must 
have  the  likeness  of  that  of  which  it  is  the  sacrament.*  These 
ideas  he  sums  up  in  his  definition— "For  that  is  properly  called  a 
sacrament,  which  is  in  such  a  manner  the  sign  of  the  grace  of  God, 
and  the  form  of  invisible  grace,  that  it  bears  its  image  (i.e.  sig- 
nifies it),  and  is  its  cause. ^  Sacraments  therefore  were  instituted 
not  only  for  the  sake  of  signifying,  but  also  of  sanctifying.  Those 
which  were  instituted  only  for  the  sake  of  signifying,  are  only 
signs  and  not  sacraments."  »  He  emphasizes  this  power  of  the 
sacrament  to  sanctify,  in  a  later  passage:  "Every  evangelical 
sacrament  accomplishes  that  which  it  figures."  * 

But  Peter  Lombard's  definition  is  almost  as  interesting  for 
what  it  does  not  say  as  for  what  it  does.  We  have  seen  that  his 
"Sentences"  were  much  influenced  by  Hugh  of  St.  Victor's  "De 
Sacramentis"  and  by  the  anonymous  "Summa  Sententiarum." 
And  yet  in  the  definition  of  sacrament,  he  does  not  borrow  their 
most  characteristic  statements.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  had  said  "A 
sacrament  is  a  corporeal  or  material  element  sensibly  presented 
from  without,  representing  from  its  likeness,  signifying  from  its 
institution,  and  containing  from  sanctification  some  invisible  and 
spiritual  grace."  ^  The  Lombard's  definition  has  the  advantage  of 
being  more  elastic,  for  it  allows  the  application  of  the  term  sacra- 
ment to  penance  and  marriage,  which  are  not  bound  to  a  corporeal 
or  material  element.®    The  definition  which  the  "Summa"  gives 

>  Augustine,  Ep.  98.  (alias  23.) 

*  Thomas  Aquinas  says  of  this— 'The  sign  of  a  sacred  thing  in  so  far  as  it 
sanctifies  men"— Signum  rei  sacrae  in  quantum  est  sanctificans  homines  (III, 
Q.  Ix,  a.  2.) 

» Dist.  I.  2. 

*  Dist.  XXII.  3. 

»  De  Sac.  Lib.  I.  P.  IX.  c.  II. 

•G.  L.  Hahn,  Die  Lehre  von  den  Sakramenten  in  ihrer  geschichtlichen 
Entwickelung  innerhalb  der  abendlandischen  Kirche  bis  zum  Concil  von  Trient 
1864.  p.  18. 


iV 


/- 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        71 

is  perhaps  a  Httle  clearer  than  Peter's  in  the  statement  that  the 
sacrament  confers  the  grace — "A  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of 
invisible  grace  gathered  therein,  which  the  sacrament  itself  Con- 
fers ;  for  it  is  not  only  the  sign  of  a  sacred  thing,  but  also  the  effi- 
cacy." ^ 

The  number  of  the  sacraments  was  naturally  influenced  by 
the  growing  definiteness  of  the  conception  of  sacrament.  Many 
ceremonies  that  could  be  called  sacraments  under  the  vague  defini- 
tion of  Augustine:  "The  sign  of  a  sacred  thing,"  could  no  longer 
be  so  called  when  a  more  definite  conception  of  the  term  had  been 
developed. 

Peter  Lombard  enumerates  seven^ :  Baptism,  Confirmation  ■ 
the  blessing  of  bread,  that  is,  the  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme 
Unction,  Ordination  and  Marriage.  In  stating  this,  he  lays  no 
claim  to  anything  new.  All  of  these  had  been  called  sacraments 
before  the  Lombard's  time.  Peter  Lombard  probably  used  the 
"Summa"  after  the  tractate  on  Marriage  by  Walter  of  Mortagne, 
and  that  on  Orders  by  Ivo  of  Chartres  had  been  added  to  it,^  and 
in  this  there  was  practically  a  recognition  of  the  seven,  though 
Ordination  is  only  spoken  of  as  the  power  of  the  keys  which  is 
conferred  through  consecration  by  the  bishop.  A  clearer  example 
of  the  enumeration  of  the  sacraments  as  seven  in  number  is  found 
in  the  "Sententiae  Divinitatis,"  which  divides  them  into  two  cate- 
gories, those  which  are  generally  common  to  all,  as  baptism,  the 
laying-on  of  hands,  penance,  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and 
the  solemn  unction  of  the  sick,  and  those  which  are  not  common, 
as  marriage,  and  holy  orders.'* 


*  Summa  Sententianim.    Tract.  IV.  c.  I. 

2  Dist.  II.  I. 

3  Realencyklopadie.  Sakrament.  (F.  Kattenbusch.)  Bd.  17.  p.  359. 

*  de  Ghellinck — A  propos  de  quelques  affirmations  du  nombre  septenaire 
des  sacrements  au  Xlle  sidcle.    Recherches  de  science  religieuse.    I.  19 10.  pp. 

493-497- 

"Mais  rinter6t  de  ce  texte  reside  avant  tout  dans  son  anteriority  sur  Pierre 

Lombard,  qu'a  la  suite  de  I'ouvrage   de  Hahn,  Ton  repr&ente  habituellement 

coiiime  le  premier  temoin  clair  et  net  du  nombre  septenaire."    Cf.  Hahn,  op.  cit. 

p.  107. 


72 


PETER  LOMBARD 


m 


It  is  evident,  however,  that  the  sacredness  of  the  number 
seven^  had  a  marked  influence  on  this  enumeration.  Both  here 
and  in  the  Hst  of  the  orders  of  clergy,  we  can  see  the  anxiety  of 
the  medieval  theologians  to  fit  their  systems  in  with  the  sacred 
number. 

That  the  fixing  of  the  number  of  the  sacraments  at  seven 
was  still  quite  a  new  idea  is  shown  by  the  slowness  of  its  accept- 
ance. The  Third  Lateran  Council  in  1179  speaks  of  the  induc- 
tion of  ecclesiastical  persons  to  their  seats,  the  instituting  of 
priests,  the  burying  of  the  dead  and  the  blessing  of  marriages  as 
sacraments.2  This  is  the  more  surprising,  as  the  Council  was 
held  under  Pope  Alexander  III,  who  as  Roland  Bandinelli,  in  his 
"Sentences,"  had  enumerated  baptism,  confirmation,  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  altar,  penance,  unction  and  matrimony,  and  in  con- 
nection with  the  unction  had  treated  of  the  keys  which  a  man 
receives  at  the  same  time  with  sacerdotal  ordination.^ 

The  Lombard's  enumeration,  however,  was  soon  accepted, 
and  the  acceptance  of  it  was  probably  influenced  by  the  sacredness 
of  the  number  seven. 

6.       THE  LOMBARD  ON  THE  WORKING  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

We  have  seen  that  in  the  treatment  of  the  definition  and 
number  of  the  sacraments,  Peter  Lombard  stands  at  the  end  of 
a  long  development.  His  position  in  regard  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  working  of  the  Sacraments  is  quite  in  contrast  to  this.  The 
simplicity  of  his  treatment  is  that  of  the  early  Middle  Ages,  for  in 


*The  sacredness  of  the  number  seven  can  be  traced  back  to  the  Baby> 
lonians.  Cf.  the  legend  of  the  seven  evil  demons.  (See  Rogers,  Cuneiform 
Parallels,  pp.  63  ff.) 

3  c.  7.  (Mansi.  XXII.  222  A.)  Et  vel  pro  perso  is  ecclesiasticis  deducendis 
ad  sedem,  vel  sacerdotibus  instituendis,  aut  raortuis  sepeliendis,  seu  etiam  nuben- 
tibus  benedicendis,  seu  etiam  aliis  sacramentis 

»Gietl — Die  Sentenzen  Rolands,  p.  268.  Traduntur  autem  he  claves  in 
promocione  sacerdocii  per  ministeriimi  episcopi.  Cum  enim  recipit  ordinem 
sacerdotalem,  simul  et  has  claves  recipit. 


i 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        73 

the  discussion  of  the  effect  of  the  various  sacraments  on  the  wor- 
shipper there  had  been  little  or  no  advance  since  St.  Augustine.* 
In  the  century  following  the  Lombard  there  were  to  be  long  dis- 
cussions of  the  "materials"  of  the  sacraments  or  the  ''elements," 
to  use  St.  Augustine's  term;  of  the  "character"  conferred  on  the 
worshipper,  and  of  whether  the  sacraments  worked  "ex  opere 
operato,"  that  is,  by  virtue  of  the  action,  or  "ex  opere  operantis," 

by  reason  of  the  agent. 

The  Lombard  sums  up  his  teaching  on  the  effect  of  baptism 
in  one  paragraph :  "The  purpose  of  the  institution  of  Baptism  is 
the  renewing  of  the  mind ;  so  that  man  who  had  been  old  through 
sin,  might  be  renewed  through  the  grace  of  baptism,  which  is 
accomplished  by  the  putting  off  of  sins  and  the  taking  on  of 
virtues.  For  by  this  means  anyone  is  made^  new  man,  by  effacing 
his  sins  and  adorning  himself  with  virtues.  The  effacement  of 
sins  drives  out  uncleanness;  the  acquisition  of  virtues  conveys 
beauty,  and  this  is  the  thing  (res)  of  this  sacrament,  namely 
inward  cleanness."  ^ 

Of  confirmation,  Peter  Lombard  says  only  that  in  this  sacra- 
ment, ''The  seven-fold  grace  of  the  .  .  .  Spirit,  with  all  full- 
ness of  sanctity  and  virtue,  comes  upon  a  man."  ^  "The  Com- 
forter is  given  to  the  baptized  person,  that  he  may  be  strength- 
ened through  the  Holy  Spirit  to  declare  unto  others  that  which 
he  himself  has  obtained  in  Baptism."  ^ 

In  his  discussions  of  the  working  of  several  of  the  sacra- 
ments, it  is  interesting  to  note  how  the  Lombard  comes  back  to 
a  comparison  of  the  sacrament,  of  which  he  is  speaking,  to  bap- 
tism. So  in  his  treatment  of  the  Eucharist :  "Through  Baptism 
we  are  cleansed,  through  the  Eucharist  we  are  made  complete  in 
what  is  good.  Baptism  extinguishes  the  fires  of  sin,  the  Eucha- 
rist restores  us  spiritually.     Wherefore  it  is  well  called  the  Eu- 


1  G.  L.  Hahn— Die  Lehre  von  den  Sakramenten  in  ihrer  geschichtlichen 
Entwickelung,  etc.  p.  282. 

2  Lib.  IV.  Dist.  III.  9. 

3  Dist.  VII.  4. 
*  Dist.  VII.  3. 


/ 


/ 


/    I 


74 


PETER  LOMBARD 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK 


75 


i 


charist,  that  is,  good  grace,  because  in  this  sacrament  there  is 
not  only  an  evidence  of  virtue  and  grace,  but  He  who  is  the  fount 
and  source  of  all  grace  is  there  received  entire."^  In  another 
Distinction  he  adds ;  "Now  this  sacrament  was  instituted  for  two 
purposes :  for  the  augmentation  of  virtue,  that  is,  of  charity,  and 
for  a  remedy  for  daily  weakness."  ^  That  Peter's  doctrine  of  the 
working  of  the  sacrament  agrees  with  the  Patristic  view  is  shown 
by  his  acceptance  of  Augustine's :  "And  because  we  fall  every  day 
Christ  is  every  day  mystically  immolated  for  us.  For  He  gave 
us  this  sacrament  of  salvation,  that  since  we  sin  daily,  and  He 
cannot  die  again,  we  may  through  this  sacrament  obtain  remis- 


sion. 


j>  2 


Peter  Lombard  also  parallels  Penance  with  Baptism.  "Pen- 
ance is  necessary  to  those  placed  far  from  God,  that  they  may 
approach  Him.  For  it  is  .  .  .  the  second  plank  after  ship- 
wreck. Because  if  anyone  should,  by  sinning,  have  sullied  the 
robe  of  innocence  received  in  Baptism,  he  can  restore  it  by  the 
remedy  of  Penance.  The  first  plank  is  Baptism,  where  the  old 
man  is  laid  aside,  and  the  new  is  put  on ;  the  second,  Penance,  by 
which  we  rise  again  after  a  fall,  while  the  old  state,  which  had 
returned,  is  repelled,  and  the  new  one  which  had  been  lost  is 
resumed.  Those  who  fall  after  Baptism  can  be  restored  through 
Penance,  but  not  through  Baptism."  ^  Furthermore,  "Penance 
is  not  performed  once  only,  but  may  be  frequently  repeated,  and 
.    .    .   through  it  pardon  is  frequently  and  repeatedly  obtained."  * 

As  we  have  already  noted,  it  was  difficult  for  the  Lombard  to 
fit  Ordination  into  the  sacramental  system.  This  is  nowhere  more 
clearly  shown  than  in  his  attempt  to  state  what  is  the  effect  of  the 
sacrament  on  the  one  ordained.  He  can  only  say  that,  "Those 
in  whose  minds  the  seven- fold  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  diffused, 
when  they  present  themselves  for  ecclesiastical  orders,  in  the 


»Dist.  VIII.  I. 
»  Dist.  XII.  8. 
«  Dist.  XIV.  I. 
*  Dist.  XIV.  4. 


- 


very  advancement  to  the  spiritual  rank  are  believed  to  receive  a 
fuller  grace."  ^ 

7.      ADJUSTMENT   OF   PENANCE  AND  ORDINATION  TO  THE 
SACRAMENTAL    SYSTEM    BY    THE    LOMBARD 

The  Lombard's  rather  hesitating  treatment  of  penance  and 
of  ordination  shows  clearly  that  it  was  still  a  comparatively  new 
thing  to  include  them  in  the  sacramental  system.  Following  St. 
Augustine's  distinction  between  the  element  and  the  word,^  he 
had  spoken  in  baptism,  confirmation  and  the  Eucharist  of  the 
"form"  of  the  sacrament,  the  "word"  which,  added  to  the  element, 
made  the  sacrament.  It  is  striking,  then,  to  find  that  neither  in 
Penance,  nor  in  Ordination  does  he  discuss  the  form  of  the  sacra- 
ment. 

He  speaks  of  Ordination  as  a  sacrament  because  "it  is  a 
sign,  that  is,  something  sacred,  in  which  spiritual  power  is  given 
to  the  one  ordained ;  and  office."  ^  In  the  discussion  of  baptism 
and  of  the  Eucharist  he  had  distinguished  between  the  sacrament 
and  the  thing  (res)  of  the  sacrament,  the  spiritual,  essential  part 
of  the  ceremony  or  service,  signified  by  the  sacrament  or  outward 
sign.  But  this  distinction  he  does  not  make  in  his  treatment  of 
Ordination.  There  is  still  a  difficulty  in  fitting  Ordination  into  the 
sacramental  system. 

There  is  a  greater  difficulty  in  including  penance  in  the  sys- 
tem, and  we  see  this  most  clearly  in  his  attempt  to  define  what  is 
the  thing  (res)  of  the  sacrament  of  penance.  "It  remains  to 
inquire  which  is  the  sacrament  in  the  act  of  penance  and  which 
its  *res.'  For  a  sacrament  is  the  sign  of  a  sacred  thing.  What 
then  is  the  sign  here  ?  Some  say  .  .  .  that  the  sacrament  here 
is  what  is  only  done  outwardly,  namely  the  outward  penance 
which  is  the  sign  of  the  inward,  that  is,  of  contrition  of  the  heart 
and  of  humility.   .    .    .  Also,  if  the  outward  penance  is  the  sacra- 


» Dist.  XXIV.  I. 

*  August.  In  Joannem  Tract.  LXXX.  n.  3. 

»  Dist.  XXIV.  10. 


1 


76 


PETER  LOMBARD 


ment  and  the  inward  its  *res/  the  latter  precedes  the  sacrament 
oftener  than  the  sacrament  precedes  it.  .  .  .  But  some  say  that 
the  outward  penance  is  also  the  inward  sacrament  and  not  two 
sacraments,  but  one,  as  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  are  not  two 
sacraments  but  one.  And  as  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Body,  so 
also  in  this  sacrament,  they  say  that  one  thing,  namely  the  out- 
ward penance,  is  the  sacrament  alone,  another  the  sacrament  and 
the  *res,'  namely  the  inward  penance,^  and  still  another  the  *res' 
and  not  the  sacrament,  namely,  the  remission  of  sins.  For  the 
inward  Penance^  is  also  the  Ves'  of  the  sacrament,  that  is,  of  the 
outward  Penance,  and  the  sacrament  of  the  remission  of  sin  which 
it  symbolizes  and  causes.  The  outward  Penance  is  also  the  sign 
of  the  inward  and  of  the  remission  of  sins."  ^ 

This  is  certainly  not  very  clear  as  one  reads  it,  and  one 
fancies  it  was  not  very  clear  to  the  Lombard  either,  as  he  struggled 
with  the  new  problem  of  making  penance  suit  the  requirements 
of  a  sacrament,  as  it  was  now  closely  defined. 


8. 


THE   SIGNIFICANCE  OF   THE  "SENTENCES^' 


Let  us  conclude  with  a  few  words  on  the  historical  signifi- 
cance of  Peter  Lombard's  work.  He  did  not  create  anything,  and 
his  ideas,  unlike  those  of  Abelard,  did  not  have  the  merit  of  orig- 
inality.^ Seeberg  says,  ^'Really,  the  only  feature  which  challenges 
our  admiration  is  the  consistent  development  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  sacraments,  and  here  Gratian  had  already  led  the  way.  But  it 
was  not  only  the  commendable  features  of  the  work,  but  in  even 
greater  degree  its  faults,  that  won  for  it  the  unique  historical 
position  which  it  came  to  occupy."  ^ 

The  Middle  Ages  needed  a  theological  compendium  and 
Peter  Lombard  gave  the  best  in  this  period.  He  had  a  gift  for 
compilation  and  system,  and  for  conciseness  and  clearness.  With 
the  exception  of  a  few  statements  he  was  rigorously  orthodox. 


*  Poenitentia. 

«  Dist.  XXII.  3. 

*  Protois,  Pierre  Lombard,  p.  40. 

^  Seeberg,  History  of  Dogmas  (tr.  Hay)  vol.  II.  p.  63. 


I 


PETER  LOMBARD  AND  HIS  TEXT-BOOK        77 

and  his  orthodoxy  secured  the  almost  immediate  success  of  his 
work.  The  impersonal  treatment  made  it  suitable  for  commen- 
tary by  professor  and  student,  and  so  made  it  invaluable  as  a  text- 
book. The  very  fact  that  he  had  not  drawn  definite  conclusions 
encouraged  study  of  the  problems  he  presented. 

Its  success  was  not  complete  for  half  a  century,  but  mean- 
while it  passed  quickly  from  Paris  into  Germany,  England,  Italy 
and  the  Low  Countries.  There  were  many  commentaries  on  the- 
"Sentences"  by  theologians  of  all  schools  of  thought — Thomists,. 
Scotists,  Occamists,  Augustinians — by  all  the  doctors,  in  fact. 
Roger  Bacon  complains  in  1267  that  interpretations  of  the  "Sen-^ 
tences"  put  those  of  Scripture  in  the  shade.  Erasmus  said  there 
were  as  many  commentaries  on  the  "Sentences"  as  there  were 
theologians.^  There  was  even  a  special  degree  conferred  on  those 
who  had  completed  their  study  of  the  book :  Bachalarius  Senten'- 
tiarus.  It  is  not  till  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  that  we* 
notice  the  slow  but  gradual  disappearance  of  the  "Libri  Quatuor 
Sententiarum." 

De  Ghellinck's  praise  is  certainly  most  generous :  "The  work 
of  Peter  Lombard  must  remain  in  the  theological  past  as  the 
crowning  work  of  several  centuries  of  elaboration  and  as  the* 
corner-stone  of  all  that  has  since  been  achieved  in  Catholic 
theology.  .  .  .  Those  who  have  made  progress  have  only 
achieved  it  aided  by  the  work  of  the  Lombard  who  prepared  the 
way  for  them.'* 


*  "There  are  as  many  commentaries  on  the  'Sentences'  of  Petrus  Lombardus 
as  there  are  theologians.  There  is  no  end  of  little  summas^  which  mix  up  one 
thing  with  another  over  and  over  again  and  after  the  manner  of  apothecaries 
fabricate  and  refabricate  old  things  from  new,  new  from  old,  one  from  many^ 
and  many  from  one."  Letter  to  Volzius  in  1518,  afterward  published  as  preface 
to  the  new  edition  of  the  Enchiridion.  (Quoted  by  Emerton,  Desiderius  Eras- 
mus, p.  III.) 


f  r 


APPENDIX 


NOTE  ON  THE  TRANSLATION 

Distinctions  I-XXVI  (earlier  chapters)  of  the  Fourth  Book 
of  Peter  Lombard's  "Sentences,"  which  deal  with  the  Sacra- 
ments, have  been  translated  from  the  Latin,  in  the  hope  that  they 
may  be  of  use  to  some  readers.  My  work  has  been  painstakingly 
criticized  and  corrected  by  Dr.  Louise  R.  Loomis,  but  I  only  am 
responsible  for  its  errors,  especially  in  the  few  passages  where  I 
ventured  to  disagree  with  her. 

Poenitentia  has  been  translated  penance  throughout,  in 
accordance  with  Roman  Catholic  usage.  Res  presented  much 
more  serious  difficulties.  In  the  end,  it  was  translated,  in  nearly 
«very  case,  thing,  and  it  has  been  left  to  the  reader  to  learn  the 
<:ontent  of  the  Latin  word.  Other  translations  were  suited  to 
only  a  few  uses  of  the  word,  or  else  seemed  to  interfere  with 
accepted  philosophic  terms.  The  only  other  alternative  was  to 
leave  it  untranslated,  as  Hamack  does,  in  his  "History  of 
Dogma." 

The  Biblical  references  and  quotations  are  according  to  the 
Douay  version,  which  in  some  instances  differs  from  the  King 
James  Version. 


't 


TRANSLATION    OF   BOOK   IV,   DISTINCTIONS    I-XXVI 

OF  THE  QUATUOR  LIBRI  SENTENTIARUM 

OF  PETER  THE  LOMBARD 

Distinction  I 

PART  I 

I.  Of  Sacraments 

The  Samaritan  who  tended  the  wounded  man,  applied  for  his 
relief  the  dressings  of  the  sacraments,^  just  as  God  instituted  the 
remedies  of  the  sacraments  against  the  wounds  of  original  and  actual 
sin.  Concerning  the  sacraments,  four  questions  first  present  them- 
selves for  consideration :  what  a  sacrament  is,  why  it  was  instituted ; 
wherein  it  consists,  and  how  it  is  performed;  and  what  the  differ- 
ence is  between  the  sacraments  of  the  old  and  the  new  covenants. 

II.  What  a  Sacrament  is. 

"A  sacrament  is  the  sign  of  a  sacred  thing  (res)."  2  However,  a 
sacred  mystery  is  also  called  a  sacrament,  as  the  sacrament  of  di- 
vinity, so  that  a  sacrament  may  be  the  sign  of  something  sacred,  and 
the  sacred  thing  signified;  but  now  we  are  considering  a  sacrament 
as  a  sign. — So,  "A  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  an  invisible 
grace. 


'» 3 


III.     What  a  sign  is. 

"But  a  sign,  is  the  thing  (res)  behind  the  form  which  it  wears  to 
the  senses,  which  brings  by  means  of  itself  something  else  to  our 
minds."  ^ 


*  Cf.  Luke  10,  30. 

*  August.,  X.  de  Civ.  Dei  c.  5,  and  II.  contra  Adversar.    Legis  et  Prophet. 
c.  9.  n.  34. 

*  Berengar,  De  Sacra  Coena.    (See  August.,  III.  Quaestion.  in  Pentateuch. 
q.  84.) 

*  August.,  II.  de  Doctr.  christ.  c.  i.  n.  i. 

79 


■MM 


80 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  I 


81 


IV.     How  a  sign  and  a  Sacrament  differ, 

"Furthermore,  some  signs  are  natural,  as  smoke  which  signifies 
fire;  others  conventional T  ^  and  of  those  which  are  conventional, 
some  are  sacraments,  some  not.  For  every  sacrament  is  a  sign,  but 
the  converse  is  not  true.  A  sacrament  bears  a  resemblance  to  the 
thing,  of  which  it  is  a  sign.  'Tor  if  sacraments  did  not  bear  a  re- 
semblance to  the  things  of  which  they  are  the  sacraments,  they  could 
not  properly  be  called  sacraments."  For  a  sacrament  is  properly  so 
called,  because  it  is  a  sign  of  the  grace  of  God  and  the  expression 
of  invisible  grace,  so  that  it  bears  its  image  and  is  its  cause.  Sacra- 
ments, therefore,  were  not  instituted  merely  in  order  to  signify  some- 
thing, but  also  as  a  means  of  sanctification.  For  things  which  were 
instituted  only  to  signify  are  signs  only,  and  not  sacraments;  such 
as  the  sacrifices  of  flesh,  and  the  ceremonial  observances  of  the  old 
law,  which  could  never  justify  those  who  offered  them;  because,  as 
the  apostle  says,^  "The  blood  of  goats  and  of  oxen  and  the  ashes  of 
an  heifer,  being  sprinkled,  sanctify  such  as  are  defiled,  to  the  cleans- 
ing of  the  flesh,"  but  not  of  the  spirit.  Now  this  uncleanness  was 
the  touching  of  a  dead  body.  Wherefore  Augustine^:  "By  that 
defilement  which  the  law  cleanses  I  understand  merely  the  touching 
of  a  dead  body,  since  anyone  who  had  touched  one,  zvas  unclean 
seven  days;  but  he  was  purified  according  to  the  law  on  the  third  day 
and  on  the  seventh,  and  was  cleansed,"  so  that  he  might  enter  the 
temple.  These  legal  observances  also  cleansed  sometimes  from 
bodily  leprosy;  but  no  one  was  ever  justified  by  the  works  of  the 
Law,  as  says  the  apostle^,  even  if  he  performed  them  in  faith  and 
charity.  Why  ?  because  God  has  ordained  them  unto  servitude,  not 
unto  justification,  so  that  they  might  be  types  of  something  to  come, 
wishing  that  these  offerings  should  be  made  to  him  rather  than  to 
idols.  They  therefore  were  signs,  yet  also  sacraments,  although  they 
are  often  called  so  incorrectly  in  the  Scriptures,  because  they  were 
rather  signs  of  a  sacred  thing  than  availing  anything  themselves. 


1  August.,  II.  de  Doctr.  christ.  c.  i.  n,  2.    The  following  is  from  August., 
Epist.  98  (alias  23)  ad  Bonifacium  episc.  n.  9. 

*  Hebrews  9,  13;  above  on  sacrifices,  etc.,  Lev.  16,  15. 

*  Libr.  IV.  Quaestion.  in  Pentateuch,  q.  33.  n.  10. 

*  Rom.  3,  20:  Gal.  2,  16.    Also  see  Rom.  5,  14:  "Adam,  who  is  a  figure  of 
him  who  was  to  come." 


i 


These  moreover  the  apostle^  calls  works  of  the  Law,  which  were 
instituted  only  to  signify  something,  or  as  a  yoke. 

V.  Why  the  Sacraments  were  instituted. 

The  sacraments  were  instituted  for  a  three- fold  reason:  for 
humility,  instruction,  and  exercise.  For  humility,  so  that  while  man, 
by  order  of  the  Creator,  abases  himself  in  worship  before  insensible 
things,  which  by  nature  are  beneath  him,  through  this  humility  and 
obedience,  he  may  become  more  pleasing  to  God,  and  more  meri- 
torious in  his  sight,  at  whose  command  he  seeks  salvation  in  things 
beneath  him,  yet  not  from  them,  but  through  them  from  God.  For 
instruction  also  were  the  sacraments  instituted,  so  that  the  mind 
might  be  taught  by  what  it  sees  outside  in  visible  form,  to  recog- 
nize the  invisible  virtue  which  is  within.  For  man,  who  before  sin 
saw  God  without  a  mediator,  through  sin  has  became  so  dulled  that 
he  is  in  no  wise  able  to  comprehend  divine  things,  unless  trained 
thereto  by  human  things. — Likewise,  the  sacraments  were  instituted 
for  exercise,  because  since  man  cannot  be  idle,  there  is  offered  him 
in  the  sacraments  a  useful  and  safe  exercise  by  which  he  may  avoid 
vain  and  harmful  occupation.  For  he  who  devotes  himself  to  good 
exercise  is  not  easily  caught  by  the  tempter;  wherefore  Jerome^ 
warns  us:  ''Always  do  some  sort  of  work,  that  the  devil  may  find 
you  occupied."  "There  are,  moreover,  three  kinds  of  exercises: 
one  aims  at  the  edification  of  the  soul,  another  aims  at  the  nourish- 
ment of  the  body,  another  at  the  destruction  of  both." — And  inas- 
much as  without  a  sacrament,  to  which  God  has  not  limited  his 
power,  he  could  have  given  grace  to  man,  he  has  for  the  aforesaid 
reasons  instituted  the  sacraments.  "There  are  two  parts  of  which 
a  sacrament  consists,  namely  words  and  things:  words,  as  the  invoca- 
tion of  the  Trinity;  things,  as  water,  oil,  and  the  like." 

VI.  Of  the  difference  between  the  old  and  the  nezv  Sacraments, 

Now  it  remains  to  note  the  difference  between  the  old  and  the 
new  sacraments;  as  we  call  sacraments  what  anciently  they  called 


*  Rom.  3,  20;  Gal.  2,  16;  Acts  15,  10. 

*  Epist.  125.  (alias  4.)  ad  Rustic,  n.  11. — This  chapter  and  the  two  passages 
following  are  taken  from  the  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  4.  c.  i.  and  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  I.  de 
Sacram.  p.  IX.  c.  3. 


s 
4 


82 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  I 


83 


il    I 


sacred  things,  such  as  sacrifices  and  oblations  and  the  hke.  The 
difference  between  these  Augustine^  indicated  briefly  when  he  said, 
"because  the  former  only  promised  and  signified  salvation,  while  the 
latter  give  it/' 

PART  II 

VII.  Of  Circumcision. 

However  there  was  among  these  sacraments  one  sacrament, 
namely  that  of  circumcision,  which  conferred  the  remedy  against 
sin  which  baptism  now  provides.  Wherefore  Augustine^:  "From 
the  time  circumcision  was  instituted  among  the  people  of  God,  which 
was  then  a  sign  of  the  justification  of  faith,  it  had  power  to  cleanse 
old  and  young  from  original  and  previous  sin ;  just  as  baptism  from 
the  time  it  was  instituted,  began  to  have  power  to  renew  a  man." 
So  Bede^:  "Under  the  Law  circumcision  brought  the  same  aid,  a 
health-bringing  cure  for  the  wound  of  original  sin,  which  baptism 
has  given  during  the  time  of  revealed  grace,  except  that  the  men  of 
old  were  not  yet  able  to  enter  the  door  of  the  heavenly  kingdom; 
however  being  comforted  after  death  by  blessed  rest  in  the  bosom 
of  Abraham,  they  awaited  with  happy  hope  their  entrance  into 
celestial  peace.'' — By  these  passages  we  are  clearly  taught  that  cir- 
cumcision, from  the  time  it  was  instituted,  was  ordained  by  God  for 
the  remission  of  original  and  actual  sin  in  children  and  adults,  just 
as  now  remission  is  given  by  baptism. 

VIII.  What  remedy  those  had  who  lived  before  circumcision. 

We  ask  now  of  the  men  who  lived  before  circumcision,  and  of 
the  women  who  lived  before  and  after,  what  remedy  they  had 
against  sin.  Some  say,  that  sacrifices  and  oblations  were  efficacious 
for  them  for  the  remission  of  their  sin.  But  it  is  better  to  say  that 
the  men  who  sprang  from  Abraham  were  justified  by  circumcision, 
and  the  women  by  faith  and  good  works,  either  their  own,  if  they 
were  adults,  or  their  parents',  if  children.  As  for  those  who  lived 
before  circumcision,  the  children  were  justified  by  the  faith  of  their 
parents;  parents  on  the  other  hand  were  justified  by  the  efficacy  of 


*  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  73.  n.  2. 

*  Libr.  II.  de  Nuptiis  et  concupisc.  c.  11,  n.  24,  and  Gratian,  C.  Ex  quo  (6.), 
de  Consecrat.  dist.  4.    See  Rom.  4,  25. 

*  Homil.  10  (on  Luke  2)  in  Circumcis.  Domini. 


.  ^  * 


i 


sacrifices,  that  is,  by  that  which  they  apprehended  spiritually  in  these 
sacrifices.  Wherefore  Gregory^ :  "That  which  is  accomplished  in 
our  time  by  the  water  of  baptism,  was  effected  in  the  time  of  the 
ancients  by  faith  alone  for  children,  or  by  the  efficacy  of  sacrifice 
for  their  elders,  or  by  the  mystery  of  circumcision  for  those  who 
sprang  from  the  stock  of  Abraham." 

IX.     Of  the  institution  and  purpose  of  circumcision. 

Here  we  must  tell  when  circumcision  was  instituted ;  and  why; 
and  why  it  was  changed  into  baptism. — Abraham  first  received^  the 
command  for  circumcision  as  a  test  of  obedience ;  nor  of  him  alone 
was  circumcision  required  but  of  his  seed,  that  is,  of  all  the  Hebrews ; 
which  circumcision  was  performed  according  to  the  Law  on  the 
eighth  day  with  a  stone  knife  in  the  flesh  of  the  foreskin.  More- 
over circumcision  was  ordained  for  many  reasons,  namely,  that 
Abraham  by  his  obedience  to  the  command  might  please  God,  whom 
Adam  had  displeased  by  untruthfulness.  Also  it  was  ordained  as  a 
sign  of  the  great  faith  of  Abraham,  who  believed  that  he  would  have 
a  son  in  whom  all  should  be  blessed.  Next,  it  was  instituted,  that 
by  this  sign,  this  people  might  be  distinguished  from  other  nations. 
In  the  flesh  of  the  foreskin  also  circumcision  was  commanded  to  be 
performed,  because  it  was  instituted  as  a  remedy  for  original  sin, 
which  we  inherit  from  our  parents  through  concupiscence,  which  dis- 
plays itself  especially  in  this  part.  And  because  in  this  part  the  first 
man  knew  the  guilt  of  disobedience,  it  is  proper  that  there  he  should 
receive  the  sign  of  obedience. 

It  was  performed  on  the  eighth  day  with  a  stone  knife,  because 
both  in  the  general  resurrection  in  the  eighth  age  to  come,  all  cor- 
ruption will  be  removed  from  the  elect  by  the  rock  Christ,  and  by  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  which  took  place  on  the  eighth  day,  the  soul 
of  whomsoever  believeth  on  him  is  circumcised  from  sins :  "There  are 
therefore  two  parts  (res)  of  this  sacrament."  ^ 


» Libr.  IV.  Moral,  c.  3.  in  the  preface;  and  Gratian,  C.  Quod  auiem  (5.),  de 
Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

*  Of.  Gen.  17,  10  f.;  Joshua  5,  2  f.— This  whole  chapter  is  taken  from  the 
Glossa  ad  Rom.  4,  10;  Gen.  17,  10,  and  John  7,  22. 

»  Summa  Sent.  tr.  4.  c.  I  for  all  of  the  second  part  of  this  distinction.  This 
last  proposition  the  Summa  took  from  August.,  tr.  30.  in  loan.  n.  5. 


84 


APPENDIX 


Circumcision  was  changed  to  baptism  on  this  account,  because 
the  sacrament  of  baptism  is  more  general  and  more  perfect,  because 
increased  by  more  abundant  grace.  For  in  circumcision  only  sins 
were  remitted,  but  neither  grace  as  an  aid  to  good  works,  nor  the 
possession  or  increase  of  virtues  was  obtained,  as  in  baptism,  where 
not  only  are  sins  removed,  but  also  grace  as  an  aid  is  conferred  and 
virtues  are  increased.  Hence  it  is  called  the  water  of  refreshment,^ 
because  it  makes  the  barren  fruitful  and  endows  the  fruitful  with 
larger  productiveness;  because  however  just  any  person  comes  to 
Baptism,  through  the  faith  and  charity  he  already  has,  he  there 
receives  richer  grace;  but  this  is  not  so  in  circumcision.  Wherefore 
to  Abraham  who  was  already  justified  by  faith,  it  was  only  a  sign, 
it  bestowed  nothing  upon  him  inwardly. 

X.     Of  children  who  die  before  the  eighth  day,  when  circumcision 
was  performed. 

If  next  we  ask  of  the  children  who  died  before  the  eighth  day, 
before  which  under  the  Law  circumcision  was  not  performed, 
whether  they  were  saved  or  not ;  the  same  answer  can  be  made  as  is 
made  for  children  who  die  before  baptism,  who,  it  is  certain,  perish. 
Hence  Beda  :^  "Who  now  in  his  Gospel  terribly  and  profitably  de- 
clares, 'Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God'  ;^  he  also  declared  previously 
in  his  Law,  *A  male  the  flesh  of  whose  foreskin  is  not  circumcised, 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  oflf  from  his  people,  because  he  made  my  cove- 
nant of  no  effect.'^  Mayhap  however,  under  the  Law,  in  face  of  the 
approach  of  death  they  circumcised  their  sons  without  sin  before 
the  eighth  day,  just  as  now  Baptism  is  administered  in  the  church." 

^  Loco  supra  cit.    Also  Comment,  in  Luc.  2. 
»     *  Cf.  Ps.  22,  2.    See  on  this,  the  Glossa  inUrlinearis, 
*  John  3,  5. 
*Gen.  17,  14. 


1 


i 


i 


I 


Distinction  II 

I.  Of  the  sacraments  of  the  new  laiv. 

Let  us  now  come  to  the  sacraments  of  the  new  covenant ;  which 
are  baptism,  confirmation,  the  blessing  of  bread,  that  is  the  eucharist, 
penance,  extreme  unction,  ordination,  marriage.^  Of  these  some 
oflFer  a  remedy  for  sin,  and  confer  helping  grace,  as  baptism;  others 
are  merely  a  remedy,  as  marriage ;  others  strengthen  us  with  grace 
and  virtue,  as  the  eucharist  and  ordination. 

If  indeed  we  are  asked  why  these  sacraments  were  not  insti- 
tuted immediately  after  the  fall  of  man,  since  in  them  are  justifica- 
tion and  salvation;  we  say  that  before  the  advent  of  Christ,  who 
brought  grace,  the  sacraments  of  grace  could  not  be  granted,  for  they 
have  derived  their  virtue  from  his  death  and  passion.  Now  Christ 
was  unwilling  to  come  before  man  was  convinced  that  he  could  find 
help  in  neither  natural  nor  written  law. 

Marriage,  howeverS  was  instituted  before  sin,  "not  at  all  as  a 
remedy,  but  as  a  sacrament  and  a  duty" ;  after  sin  indeed  it  became 
a  remedy  against  the  corruption  of  carnal  concupiscence ;  of  which 
we  will  treat  in  its  place.^ 

II.  Of  baptism. 

Now  let  us  consider  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  "which  is  first 
among  the  sacraments  of  the  new  grace.  The  baptism  of  Christ, 
John  foretold  by  his  own  baptism,  and  he  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  to  perform  baptism,  but  in  water,  not  in  the  Spirit,  as  he  him- 
self says :  'I  baptize  you  in  water  unto  penance.'  *  He  purified  indeed 
only  the  bodies,  he  did  not  cleanse  from  sins."  ^ 


» Rest  of  this  distinction  taken  almost  wholly  from  Hugh  of  St.  Victor's 
L  de  Sacram.  p.  VIIL  c.  3.    Cf.  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  5.  c.  i.    See  L  Cor.  10,  16. 

'  Hugh,  ibid.  c.  13.    See  Gen.  2,  24. 

»  See  below,  dist.  XXVL 

*  Poenitentia. 

»  Sum.  Sent.  loc.  cit. — also  for  all  that  follows.  See  Matt.  3,  11 ;  Mark  1,8; 
Luke  3,  16;  John  i,  26;  Acts  i,  5.  and  19,  4. 

85 


86 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  II 


87 


III.  Of  the  difference  between  the  baptism  of  John  and  that  of 

Christ, 

The  baptism  of  John  was  unto  penance,  not  unto  remission; 
whereas  the  baptism  of  Christ  was  unto  remission;  for  John  bap- 
tizing men  called  to  penance,  and  those  whom  he  baptized  he  taught 
to  do  penance,  according  to  this  passage:  "They  came  to  John  in 
the  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins."  ^  But  in  the  baptism  of  John  sins 
were  not  remitted,  as  they  are  in  the  baptism  of  Christ. 

IV.  Of  what  avail  was  the  baptism  of  John? 

"What  avail  therefore  had  the  baptism  of  John  ?  By  the  practice 
of  baptism,  it  prepared  men  for  the  baptism  of  Christ." — But  we  ask, 
why  is  it  called  the  baptism  of  John,  as  the  Truth  says :  "The  baptism 
of  John,  whence  is  it  ?"  2  Because  the  work  of  John  there  was  only 
the  visible  one  of  washing  the  outside,  not  the  invisible  grace  of  God 
working  within.  Nevertheless  this  work  of  John  was  also  from 
God  and  his  baptism  was  from  God,  not  from  man;  but  it  was 
called  of  man,  because  nothing  was  there  done  that  man  did  not  per- 
form. 

V.  //  his  baptism  was  a  sacrament. 

If  indeed  we  are  asked  whether  it  was  a  sacrament;  we  may 
grant  that  it  was,  in  the  sense  in  which  legal  symbols  are  called  sacra- 
ments. For  the  baptism  of  John  signified  a  sacred  thing,  namely  the 
baptism  of  Christ,  which  was  not  only  to  penance,  but  also  to  the 
remission  of  sins. 

VI.  Of  the  form  of  the  baptism  of  John. 

Here  we  must  consider  whether  those  baptized  by  John  were 
again  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  Christ,  and  what  form  of  words 
John  used. — Those  who  were  baptized  by  John,  ignorant  that  the 
holy  Spirit  existed,  and  putting  their  hope  in  his  baptism,  were  after- 
wards baptized  with  the  baptism  of  Christ.— Also  the  baptism  of 
John  was  performed  in  the  name  of  the  Coming  One.    So  Jerome^ 

*Matt.  3,  6;  Mark  i,  5. 
*  Matt.  21,25. 

»  Comment,  in  loel  c.  2.  See  also  Acts  19,  4.  and  2.  Cf.  C.  Aliud  est  (39.), 
de  Consecrat.  dist.  4.    For  the  laying-on  of  hands  on  the  baptized,  see  Acts  8,  17. 


ti 


I' 


on  Joel:  "He  who  says  that  be  believes  on  Christ,  and  does  not 
believe  on  the  holy  Spirit,  has  not  yet  clear  eyes.  Wherefore  those 
baptized  by  John  in  the  name  of  the  Coming  One,  that  is,  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  because  they  said:  'But  we  have  not  heard  if  there  be  a  holy 
Spirit',  were  baptized  a  second  time,  or  rather  they  received  the  true 
baptism."  But  they  who  had  not  placed  hope  in  the  baptism  of  John, 
and  believed  on  the  Father  and  Son  and  holy  Spirit,  were  not  bap- 
tized afterwards,!  but  received  the  holy  Spirit  by  the  laying-on  of 
hands  upon  them  by  the  apostles.  Others  again  who  did  not  so 
believe  were  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  Christ,  as  we  have  said 
before.  Hence  Jerome2:  "Those  who  did  not  know  the  holy  Spirit, 
when  they  received  the  baptism  of  John,  were  baptized  again,"  lest 
any  one  of  the  Jews  or  of  the  Gentiles  should  think  that  water  with- 
out the  holy  Spirit  could  suffice  for  salvation.  On  this  point  also, 
Ambrose^  in  the  first  book  on  the  holy  Spirit :  "Some  denied  that 
they  knew  the  holy  Spirit,  since  they  said  they  were  baptized  with 
the  baptism  of  John,  who  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  coming  Jesus, 
not  in  his  own  name.  These  therefore,  because  they  were  not  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Christ  nor  with  faith  in  the  holy  Spirit,  could 
not  have  received  the  sacrament  of  baptism;  they  were  therefore 
baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ,  nor  was  baptism  repeated  for  them, 
but  renewed." 


III. 


1  This  opinion  not  usually  accepted.    See  Bonaventura.    Dist.  II.    Quaest. 

*  Epist.  69  (83.)  ad  Oceanum  n.  6. 

»  Cap.  c.  3.  n.  41.  42,  with  some  changes  and  omissions. 


b 


DISTINCTION  III 


89 


Distinction  III 

PART  I 

I.     What  baptism  is. 

In  the  next  place  we  must  consider  what  baptism  is,  and  what 
its  form  is,  and  when  it  was  instituted,  and  the  cause  of  its  institu- 
tion.— By  baptism  we  mean  an  immersion,  that  is,  an  exterior  cleans- 
ing of  the  body  administered  under  a  prescribed  form  of  words. 
For  if  the  cleansing  takes  place  without  the  word,  there  is  no  sacra- 
ment, but  with  the  addition  of  the  word  to  the  element,  it  becomes 
a  sacrament;  not  that  the  element  itself  becomes  the  sacrament,  but 
the  cleansing  performed  in  the  element.     Wherefore  Augustine  :> 
"Baptism  is  consecrated  by  the  word ;  take  away  the  word,  and  what 
is  water,  except  water?  the  word  is  added  to  the  element,  and  it 
becomes  a  sacrament.    Whence  is  this  great  virtue  of  water,  that  it 
should  touch  the  body  and  cleanse  the  heart,  unless  it  be  by  the  word 
working?  not  because  the  word  is  said,  but  because  it  is  beheved. 
For  in  the  word  itself  the  passing  sound  is  one  thing,  the  virtue 
remaining  is  another."     Therefore  the  sacrament  of  baptism  con- 
sists of  two  parts,  namely  the  word  and  the  element.    So  that  even  if 
other  things  are  lacking  which  were  instituted  for  the  beautifying 
of  the  sacrament,  it  is  none  the  less  a  true  sacrament  and  sacred, 
provided  there  be  present  the  word  and  the  element.    For  both  in 
this  sacrament  and  in  others  some  things  are  customarily  done  for 
the  beautifying  and  honoring  of  the  sacrament,  some  things   for 
the  substance  and  purpose  of  the  sacrament.     The  word  and  the 
element  are  of  the  substance  of  this  sacrament,  the  other  things 
heighten  its  solemnity. 

II.     Of  the  form  of  baptism. 

But  what  is  this  word,  the  addition  of  which  to  the  element, 
makes  the  sacrament  ?    The  Truth2  teaches  you,  what  is  the  form  of 

»In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  80.  n.  3.  and  de  Cataclysmo,  c.  3.  n.  3;  C.  Detrahe 
verbum  (54.),  c.  i.  q.  i. 
*  Matt.  28,  19. 

88 


< 


V^i 


•4 


this  sacrament  when  he  says  to  the  disciples:  "Go  ye,  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son 
and  of  the  holy  Spirit."  Therefore  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity  is 
given  as  the  word,  by  which  baptism  is  consecrated ;  and  this  is  the 
form  of  words  with  which  baptism  is  administered.  Wherefore 
Pope  Zachariasi  says  to  Bishop  Boniface :  "It  was  most  positively 
declared  in  the  Synod  of  the  Angles,  that  whoever  was  immersed 
without  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity,  did  not  have  the  sacrament  of 
regeneration ;  a  statement  which  is  entirely  true,  because  if  anyone 
IS  immersed  in  the  font  of  baptism  without  the  invocation  of  the 
Trinity,  he  is  not  a  complete  Christian,  unless  he  is  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  holy  Spirit." 

III.     That  the  Apostles  baptised  in  the  name  of  Christ. 

Nevertheless  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,^  that  the 
Apostles  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ;  but  in  this  name,  as  Am- 
brose3  explains,  the  whole  Trinity  is  understood :  "For  when  you 
say  Christ,  the  Father  is  understood,  by  whom  he  was  anointed,  and 
he  himself  who  was  anointed,  and  the  holy  Spirit  through  whom  he 
was  anointed."  Wherefore  Pope  Nicholas  to  the  inquiries  of  the  Bul- 
gars* :  "You  assert  that  many  were  baptized  by  a  certain  Jew ;  and 
you  ask  what  is  to  be  done  in  that  case.  They  certainly  have  been 
baptized,  if  they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  holy  Trinity  or 
in  the  name  of  Christ,  as  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  for  it 
IS  one  and  the  same  thing,  as  Saint  Ambrose  explains." 

IV.     //  baptism  can  be  administered  in  the  name  of  the  Father  or 
of  the  holy  Spirit. 

Here  we  are  asked  whether  Baptism  would  be  valid,  if  it  were 
admmistered  in  the  name  of  the  Father  only,  or  of  the  holy  Spirit 
as  when  it  is  administered  in  the  name  of  Christ.    Ambrose^  seems* 
to  say,  that  if  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  is  accepted  in  faith,  and  but 
one  person  is  named,  the  sacrament  is  complete ;  and  conversely,  if 

»  Can.  In  Synodo  Anglorum  (83.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

*  Acts  8,  12. 

'  I.  de  Spiritu  S.  c.  3.  n.  44. 

*  C.  A  quodam  ludaeo  (24.)  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

»  Loc.  cit.  n.  42.    Following  is  from  ibid.  n.  43,  the  third,  n.  44. 


90 


APPENDIX 


three  are  named,  and  faith  is  not  right  concerning  some  one  of  them, 
the  mystery  is  made  void.  For  he  says  thus:  "Where  there  is  not 
the  complete  sacrament  of  baptism,  it  is  accounted  neither  a  begin- 
ning nor  any  form  of  baptism.  Now  it  is  complete,  if  you  confess 
the  Father  and  Son  and  holy  Spirit.  If  you  deny  one,  you  destroy 
the  whole.  Just  as  if  you  mention  one  in  the  (baptismal)  formula, 
either  Father,  or  Son,  or  holy  Spirit,  and  in  faith  deny  neither  the 
Father  nor  the  Son  nor  the  holy  Spirit,  it  is  a  complete  sacrament  of 
faith ;  so  also,  although  you  say  Father  and  Son  and  holy  Spirit,  and 
restrict  the  power  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  holy 
Spirit,  the  whole  mystery  is  void."  "For  when  you  say  in  the  name 
of  Christ,  through  the  unity  of  the  name  the  mystery  is  complete; 
nor  is  the  Spirit  absent  from  the  Baptism  of  Christ,  because  Christ 
baptized  in  the  Spirit."  ^ 

"Now  let  us  consider,  whether,  as  we  read  that  the  sacrament 
of  baptism  is  complete  in  the  name  of  Christ,  so  also  if  we  name  only 
the  holy  Spirit,  nothing  is  lacking  to  fulfil  the  mystery.  Let  us 
follow  the  reasoning :  whoever  has  named  one,  has  signified  the  Trin- 
ity; if  you  say  Christ,  you  designate  also  the  Father,  by  whom  the 
Son  was  anointed,  and  him  who  was  anointed,  that  is,  the  Son,  and 
the  Spirit  with  whom  he  was  anointed.  For  it  is  written  :2  'This 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  whom  God  anointed  with  the  holy  Spirit.'  And  if 
you  name  the  Father,  you  indicate  equally  his  Son  and  the  Spirit  of 
his  mouth,  provided  that  you  include  them  also  in  your  heart.  And 
if  you  say  the  holy  Spirit,  you  speak  of  God  the  Father  from  whom 
he  proceeds  and  his  Son,  whose  the  Spirit  is.  Also,  that  authority 
may  be  added  to  reason,  the  Lord  says:^  'Moreover  ye  shall  be  bap- 
tized in  the  holy  Spirit.'  "  By  these  words  he  shows  that  we  can 
rightfully  be  baptized  in  the  holy  Spirit. 

From  the  above  you  have  understood  clearly  that  baptism  can 
be  administered  in  the  name  of  Christ ;  whence  it  seems  no  less  to  be 
implied  that  true  baptism  can  be  administered  in  the  name  of  the 
Father  alone,  or  of  the  holy  Spirit  alone,  provided  he  who  baptizes 
holds  the  faith  of  the  Trinity,  which  Trinity  is  signified  by  any  of 


DISTINCTION  III 


91 


»John  I,  33;  Acts  I,  5. 
*  Acts  10,  38. 
3  Acts  I,  5. 
On  the  exposition  of  Ambrose,  cf.  Bernard,  Tract,  de  baptismo  c.^.  n.  7. 


\' 


these  names.  But  if  anyone  believing  wrongly  and  intending  to  lead 
into  error,  mentions  one  only  of  the  three,  he  does  not  fulfill  the 
mystery.  As  for  what  Ambrose  says,  that  the  mystery  is  void  even 
though  the  three  are  named,  if  he  who  baptizes  lessens  the  power  of 
the  Father  or  of  the  Son  or  of  the  holy  Spirit,  that  is  if  he  thinks 
wrongly  of  the  power  of  any  one  of  these,  not  believing  the  power 
of  the  three  is  one;  this  must  be  understood  of  one  who  does  not 
intend  to  baptize  nor  believe  in  baptizing,  who  not  only  lacks  faith, 
but  also  has  not  the  intention  of  baptizing. — Whoever  therefore 
baptizes  in  the  name  of  Christ,  baptizes  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity, 
which  is  thereby  understood.  Nevertheless  it  is  safer  to  name  the 
three,  so  that  we  say:  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  holy  Spirit;  not  in  the  names,  but  in  the  name,  that  is  in 
invocation  or  in  confession  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
holy  Spirit;  for  thereby  the  whole  Trinity  is  invoked,  that  it  may 
work  invisibly  through  itself,  just  as  outside  visibly  through  the 
ministry.  If  however  we  say  in  the  names,  then  it  is  not  a  sacrament, 
because  the  form  of  baptism  is  not  preserved. 

PART  II 

V.     Of  the  institution  of  baptism. 

As  for  the  institution  of  baptism,  when  it  began,  there  are  vari- 
ous opinions.  Some  say  baptism  was  instituted,  when  Christ  told 
Nicodemus:^  "Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  holy 
Spirit,"  etc.  Others  say  baptism  was  instituted  when  he  said  to  the 
Apostles  :2  *'Go  ye,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  holy  Spirit."  But  this  he  said  to 
them  after  the  resurrection,  in  his  instructions  for  the  calling  of  the 
Gentiles,  while  before  his  passion  he  had  sent  them  two  by  two  to 
preach  in  Judea,  and  to  baptize,  with  the  words  :^  "Go  not  aside  into 
the  way  of  the  Gentiles."  At  that  time  therefore  was  baptism  insti- 
tuted, because  they  then  both  preached  and  baptized. 

If  now  we  are  asked,  under  what  form  the  apostles  then  bap- 
tized ;  we  can  surely  reply :  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  that  is,  under 
the  form  which  they  baptized  the  Gentiles  afterwards;  for  we  caa 

*  John  3,  5.    Cf.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II  de  Sacram,  p.  VI.  c.  4. 

2  Matt.  28,  19. 

3  Matt.  10,  5. 


92 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  III 


93 


understand  that  it  was  given  them  before  the  passion,  aUhough  it  is 
not  so  recorded.  Christ  did  not  therefore  first  give  them  this  form, 
when  he  sent  them  to  evangehze  the  Gentiles;  but  rather  the  form 
which  he  had  given  before  when  he  sent  them  into  Judea,  he  after- 
ward repeated  when  he  sent  them  to  the  Gentiles. — Accordingly  it  is 
more  fitting  to  say  that  the  institution  was  established,  when  Christ 
was  baptized  by  John  in  the  Jordan ;  which  he  arranged,  not  because 
he  wished  to  be  cleansed,*  since  he  was  without  sin,  but  because  **by 
the  contact  of  his  pure  flesh  he  bestowed  regenerating  power  on  the 
waters,"  so  that  whoever  was  afterwards  immersed,  with  the  invoca- 
tion of  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  might  be  cleansed  from  sin.  At  that 
time  therefore  the  baptism  of  Christ  was  instituted,  by  which  the 
Trinity,  whose  mystery  therein  was  made  known,  baptizes  a  man 
within. 

VI.  Why  it  is  performed  in  water  only. 

Moreover  this  sacrament  is  celebrated  only  in  water,  not  in  any 
other  liquid,  as  Christ  says :  "Unless  a  man  be  bom  again  of  water," 
etc.  And  therefore  we  are  directed  to  i>erform  it  uniformly  in  water, 
that  we  may  understand  that  *'just  as  water  washes  away  uncleanness 
from  the  body  and  the  garments,  so  baptism  by  purifying  removes 
the  stains  of  the  soul  and  the  uncleanness  of  vices."  ^  Or  for  this 
reason,  that  poverty  may  excuse  no  one,  as  might  happen  if  baptism 
were  performed  in  wine  or  in  oil,  and  in  order  that  the  common 
material  for  baptizing  may  be  found  everywhere;  this  is  what  the 
water,  which  flowed  from  the  side  of  Christ,  signified,  just  as  blood 
was  the  sign  of  the  other  sacrament.  Therefore  baptism  cannot  be 
consecrated  in  any  other  liquid  than  water. 

VII.  Of  immersion^  how  many  times  it  should  be  performed. 

If  then  we  are  asked  how  the  immersion  should  be  performed ; 
we  reply  briefly,  either  once,  or  thrice,  according  to  the  varying  cus- 
tom of  the  Church.    So  Gregory  :^  "Concerning  the  trine  immersion 


*  Matt.  3,  i6;  Mark  i,  8;  Luke  3,  22;  John  i,  27.    For  the  passage  which 
follows:  C.  Nunquam  aquae  (10.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

*  Ambrose,  Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Rom.  6,  4.  (among  Ambrose's  works.) 

*  I.  Epistolar.  indiction.  9.  epist.  43.  (alias  41.),  (some  parts  omitted).    Also, 
C.  De  trina  mersione  (80.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 


" 


1 


of  baptism,  no  truer  answer  can  be  given  than  what  you  yourselves 
have  already  thought;  that  in  the  one  faith  of  the  holy  Church 
diverse  custom  does  no  harm.     For  since  in  the  three  personalities 
there  is  one  substance,  there  can  be  nothing  reprehensible  in  immers- 
ing a  child  in  baptism  thrice  or  once,  because  in  three  immersions 
the  Trinity  of  persons  may  be  symbolized  and  in  one  the  Unity  of  the 
Godhead.     We  indeed,  who  immerse  thrice,  also  signify  the  sacra- 
ment of   the   three   days'   entombment." — According  to   this,   it   is 
allowable  to  immerse  not  only  thrice,  but  also  only  once.     However 
it  is  only  allowable  to  immerse  once,  where  such  is  the  custom  of  the 
Church.    If  anyone  should  begin  to  do  it  where  such  was  not  the  cus- 
tom, or  should  assert  that  there  should  be  but  one  immersion,  he 
would  make  himself  reprehensible.     Wherefore  Haymo  :^  "Cyprian 
abounded  in  his  understanding  when  he  immersed  children  once  in 
^  baptism,   because   what   he   understood,   he   carried   out   zealously, 
*  abounding  in  good  works,  although  he  ignorantly  did  wrong  in  this 
respect :    But  because  he  abounded  in  good  works,  afterwards,  when 
he  had  been  rebuked  by  God,  he  abounded  in  a  higher  understanding, 
immersing  children  thrice."— Here  you  have  it  that  he  did  wrong, 
who  immersed  once ;  but  this  was  because  the  custom  of  his  Church 
held  otherwise,  or  because  he  asserted  that  only  one  immersion  was 
allowable.    As  for  the  trine  immersion  Augustine  says  :^  ''After  we 
professed  to  believe,  we  thrice  plunged  our  heads  into  the  sacred 
font,  and  this  order  of  baptism  is  celebrated  so  as  doubly  to  sym- 
bolize the  mystery.    Rightly  were  you  immersed  thrice,  who  received 
baptism  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity.     Rightly  immersed  thrice  be- 
cause you  received  baptism  in  the  name  of  Christ,  who  rose  from  the 
dead  on  the  third  day.    For  immersion  thrice  repeated  is  a  type  of 
the  Lord's  sepulture."— Therefore  it  is  settled,  that  those  who  are 
to  be  baptized  should  be  immersed   thrice;   and  yet  if  they  are 
immersed  only  once,  they  receive  a  true  baptism.     And  he  who 
immerses  only  once  does  not  sin,  unless  the  custom  of  his  Church  is 
different,  or  unless  he  asserts  that  it  should  be  done  only  in  this  way.^ 


*  Exposit.  in  Epist.  ad  Rom.  14,  5. 

•Serm.  de  Mysterio    baptismi  (among  his  works);  and  C.  Postquam  vos 
(78.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

»  This  and  the  preceding  chapter  from  Simi.  Sent.  tr.  5.  c.  4  and  10.  (order 
changed  somewhat.) 


^ 


94 


APPENDIX 


VIII.  When  circumcision  lost  its  power. 

Also  we  are  frequently  asked  if  circumcision  lost  its  power 
immediately  on  the  institution  of  baptism. — To  this  we  reply  that 
all  commands  of  the  law  were  terminated  by  the  death  of  Christ. 
From  that  time  therefore  circumcision  lost  its  power  so  that  there- 
after it  did  not  help ;  it  rather  hindered  those  who  performed  it ;  but 
until  the  oblation  of  the  true  host  it  was  able  to  help.  For  if  before 
the  passion  the  commands  of  the  law  had  come  to  an  end,  Christ 
would  not,  when  the  passion  was  imminent,  have  eaten  the  Passover 
with  his  disciples. 

IX.  Of  the  cause  of  the  institution  of  baptism. 

The  purpose  of  the  institution  of  baptism  is  the  renewing  of 
the  mind,  so  that  man  who  had  been  old  through  sin,  might  be 
renewed  through  the  grace  of  baptism,  which  is  accomplished  by  the 
putting  off  of  sins  and  by  the  taking  on  of  virtues.  For  by  this 
means  anyone  is  made  a  nezv  man,  by  effacing  his  sins  and  adorning 
himself  with  virtues.  The  effacement  of  sins  drives  out  unclean- 
ness,  the  acquisition  of  virtues  conveys  beauty,  and  this  is  the  object 
(res)  of  this  sacrament,  namely  inward  cleanness. 

If  we  are  asked,  whether  baptism  has  opened  heaven,  which 
circumcision  did  not  open ;  we  declare  that  neither  baptism  nor  cir- 
cumcision opened  to  us  an  entrance  to  the  kingdom,  but  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  Saviour,  and  if  that  had  been  offered  during  the  time  of 
circumcision,  the  men  of  that  time  would  have  entered  the  kingdom. 
Therefore  the  object  of  this  sacrament  is  justification. 


i 


Distinction  IV 


PART  I 


I.  Of  those  who  receive  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  (res),  and  the 

thing  and  not  the  sacrament,  and  the  sacrament  and  not  the 
thing. 

Here  we  must  say  that  some  receive  the  sacrament  and  the  thing, 
some  the  sacrament  and  not  the  thing,  some  the  thing  and  not  the 
sacrament.  All  infants  receive  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  at  the 
same  time,  who  are  cleansed  in  baptism  from  original  sin ;  although 
some  deny  that  sins  are  forgiven  to  children  who  are  about  to  die, 
and  support  this  opinion  by  the  word  of  Augustine  i^  Sacraments 
accomplish  what  they  symbolize  in  the  elect  only ;  they  do  not  under- 
stand that  this  must  be  interpreted:  that,  while  the  sacraments 
accomplish  remission  in  others,  they  do  not  do  it  for  them  unto  sal- 
vation, but  only  for  the  elect.  For  that  in  baptism  sin  is  remitted 
to  all  infants,  Augustine  clearly  says^ :  ''From  the  new-born  infant 
to  the  decrepit  old  man,  just  as  no  one  is  debarred  from  baptism, 
so  there  is  no  one  who  does  not  die  to  sin  in  baptism;  but  infants 
to  original  sin  only,  adults  however  to  all  sins  which  they  have  added 
to  original  sin  by  evil  living,"  unless  the  enormity  of  their  life 
prevents.  Some  also  who  are  baptized  with  faith,  receive  the  sacra- 
ment and  the  thing. 

II.  Of  those  who  receive  it  without  sincerity. 

Those  indeed  who  receive  it  without  faith  or  without  sincerity, 
receive  the  sacrament  and  not  the  thing.  Wherefore  Jerome^: 
"There  are  the  washings  of  Gentiles,  heretics,  but  they  do  not 
wash  unto  salvation.  In  the  church  also  those  who  do  not  receive 
baptism  with  full  faith  receive  water  but  not  the  Spirit."  Augustine* 


*  Seems  to  be  gathered  from  Lib.  II.  de  Peccator.  meritis  et  remis.  27.  n.  44. 

*  Enchirid.  c.  43.  n.  13;  and  C.  A  parvulo  (134.),  de  Cons.  dist.  4. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Comment,  in  Ezech.  c.  16.  4. 

*  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  77.  n.  2. 

95 


X 


96 


APPENDIX 


also  says:  "There  were  sacraments  common  to  all  Jews,  ^ut  grace 
was  not  common  to  all,  which  is  the  virtue  of  sacraments,  so  now 
baptism  is  common  to  all  baptized,  but  not  the  virtue  of  baptism,  that 
is,  grace  itself."    Likewise^ :  "Everyone  who  already  has  become  the 
master  of  his  own  will,  when  he  comes  to  the  sacrament  of  the  faith- 
ful, unless  he  does  penance  for  his  old  life,  cannot  begin  a  new. 
From  this  penance  at  baptism,  children  only  are  exempt."— By  these 
and  other  testimonies  it  is  clearly  shown  that  the  true  grace  of  remis- 
sion is  not  conferred  in  baptism  on  adults  without  faith  and  penance, 
because  remission  is  not  given  in  baptism  even  to  infants,  who  are  not 
able  to  have  their  own  faith,  without  the  faith  of  another.     If  any- 
one therefore  approaches  without  sincerity,  not  having  true  contri- 
tion of  heart,  he  receives  the  sacrament  without  the  thing.— Never- 
theless Augustine  seems  to  say,  that  all  sins  are  pardoned  even  to  one 
who  comes  without  sincerity,  who  even  hates  his  brother  in  the  very 
moment  in  which  he  is  baptized,  but  that  after  baptism  the  sins 
immediately  return ;  but  he  does  not  make  this  as  an  assertion,  but 
rather  compares  this  view  and  the  foregoing  opinion.     For  he  says 
thus  :2  To  those  who  "are  baptized  with  a  false  heart,  either  their  sins 
are  in  no  wise  remitted— because  'the  holy  Spirit  of  discipline  will  flee 
from  the  deceitfur^— or  else  while  remitted  in  that  very  moment  of 
time  by  the  strength  of  the  sacrament,  they  are  reimputed  because  of 
deceit ;  so  that  also  this  may  be  true^ :  'As  many  of  you  as  were  bap- 
tized in  Christ,'  etc.,  and  this^ :  'the  holy  Spirit  of  discipline  will  shun 
the  deceitfur ;  so  that  the  sanctity  of  baptism  adorns  him  with  Christ, 
and  the  ruin  of  deceit  deprives  him  of  Christ."    "For  that  sins  re- 
mitted return,  where  there  is  not  brotherly  charity,  the  Lord  also 
clearly  teaches  in  the  case  of  that  servant  from  whom  the  Lord 
demanded  the  debt  he  had  remitted,  because  he  would  not  forgive  his 


» Serm.  351  (alias  50.  among  the  homilies)  c.  2.  n.  2;  and  C.  Omnis  qui  iam 
(96.),  ibid. 

« I.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  12.  n.  19;  also  for  the  following  pas- 
sages,  first  n.  20;  second  ibid.,  below;  third,  n.  18;  fourth,  ibid.,  below.  The  first 
three  are  in  C.  Quomodo  exaudit  (41.),  ibid.  §6;  the  following,  C.  Ostenditur  illos 
(32.),  ibid.  §2.;  last,  C.  Tunc  valere  (42.),  ibid. 

'Wisdom  I,  5. 

♦  Gal.  3,  27. 

*  Wisdom  I,  5. 


,  (^  > 


7 


I 


DISTINCTION  IV  97 

fellow-servant."  "Thus  the  grace  of  baptism  is  not  hindered  from 
remitting  all  sins,  even  though  brotherly  hatred  persists  in  the  mind 
of  him  to  whom  they  are  forgiven.  For  yesterday  is  forgiven,  and 
whatever  remains  over;  and  the  very  hour  and  moment  before  bap- 
tism are  forgiven  even  in  baptism.  Then  however  the  man  begins 
immediately  to  be  guilty  not  only  of  subsequent,  but  also  of  past  days, 
hours  and  minutes,  as  all  those  sins  which  were  remitted  return." 
This,  as  we  have  said  before,  he  does  not  make  as  an  assertion ;  as 
is  shown  from  what  he  says  in  the  same  book,  thus :  "If  an  insincere 
man  comes  to  baptism,  his  sins  are  forgiven  him,  or  they  are  not  for- 
given ;  let  them  choose  which  they  prefer."— You  clearly  discern,  if 
you  pay  attention,  that  Augustine  did  not  say  it  as  an  assertion,  but 
as  a  question,  and  as  a  reference  to  the  opinion  of  others.  For  he 
says  the  same:  "Then  baptism  begins  to  have  power  for  salvation, 
when  the  deceit  departs  in  true  confession,  which,  while  the  heart 
persevered  in  malice,  did  not  allow  cleansing  of  sins  to  take  place." 
Therefore  sins  are  not  remitted  to  one  who  comes  without  sincerity. 

III.     How  this  is  to  he  understood:  As  many  of  you  as  were  bap- 
tised in  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ. 

We  are  asked  therefore  how  this  is  to  be  taken '}  "As  many  of 
you  as  were  baptized  in  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ."— We  can  say 
that  those  who  are  baptized  in  Christ,  that  is,  in  conformity  with 
Christ,  just  as  they  die  to  their  old  sin,  as  Christ  to  the  old  penalty, 
put  on  Christ,  whom  through  grace  they  have  dwelling  in  them.  It 
can  be  explained  in  another  way :  For  in  two  ways  we  are  said  to  put 
on  Christ :  either  by  the  receiving  of  the  sacrament  or  by  the  com- 
prehension of  the  thing.  Wherefore  Augustine  :2  "Men  put  on 
Christ  sometimes  as  far  as  receiving  the  sacrament,  sometimes  as 
far  as  sanctifying  the  life;  and  the  first  may  be  true  of  the  good  and 
the  bad ;  the  latter  is  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  good  and 
the  pious."  All  therefore  who  are  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
put  on  Christ  either  by  the  receiving  of  the  sacrament,  or  by  sancti- 
fication. 


'  Rom.  6,  4. 

2  Lib.  V.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  24,  n.  34;  and  C.  Quomodo  exaudit, 
(41.)  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4.  §1. 


i 


98 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  IV 


99 


PART  II 

IV.     That  suffering  and  faith  and  contrition  take  the  place  of 
baptism. 

There  are  also  some,  as  we  said  above,  who  receive  the  thing 
and  not  the  sacrament.    For  those  who  shed  their  blood  for  the  name 
of  Jesus,  even  if  they  do  not  receive  the  sacrament,  receive  the 
thing.   Wherefore  Augustine i^  "Whoever  die  for  the  confession  of 
Christ,  even  though  they  have  not  received  the  washing  of  regen- 
eration, yet  it  suffices  to  remit  their  sins,  as  much  as  if  they  were 
washed  in  the  sacred  font  of  baptism."— You  have  heard  that  suffer- 
ing received  for  the  name  of  Jesus  takes  the  place  of  baptism.    Not 
only  does  suffering  take  the  place  of  baptism,  but  also  faith  and  con- 
trition, when  necessity  prevents  the  sacrament,  as  Augustine  clearly 
shows  when  he  says  :^  'The  blessed  Cyprian,  in  the  fourth  book  on 
Baptism,  thinks  that  what  was  said  to  the  thief  who  had  not  been 
baptized :  This  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise,'  ^  affords  no 
slight  proof  that  suffering  sometimes  takes  the  place  of  baptism.     I 
have  considered  this  repeatedly  and  find  that  not  only  suffering  for 
the  name  of  Christ,  but  even  faith  and  turning  of  heart,  can  supply 
what  was  lacking  by  baptism,  if  by  chance,  owing  to  the  shortness  of 
time,  a  man  cannot  be  succored  by  celebrating  the  mystery  of  bap- 
tism.    Nor  indeed  was  that  thief  crucified  for  the  name  of  Christ, 
but  for  the  sake  of  his  crimes ;  nor  did  he  suffer,  because  he  believed, 
but  while  he  suffered,  he  believed.    How  much  therefore  can  faith 
accomplish,  even  without  the  sacrament  of  visible  baptism — is  shown 
in  the  case  of  that  thief,  as  the  Apostle  says:  'With  the  heart  we 
believe  unto  justice,  but  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made  unto 
salvation'  ^ ;  but  this  is  accomplished  invisibly,  when  not  contempt 
for  religion,  but  the  pressure  of  necessity  prevents  the  mystery  of 
baptism.'*    "And  certainly  baptism  can  take  place  when  there  is  no 
turning  of  the  heart ;  whereas  turning  of  the  heart  can  exist  when 
baptism  has  not  been  received,  but  it  cannot  exist  when  baptism  is 


»  Lib.  XIII.  de  Civ.  Dei,  c.  7;  cf.  Bernard,  tract,  de  Baptismo,  c.  2.  n.  8. 

*  Lib.  IV.  de  Baptismo  contra.  Donatistas,  c.  22.  n.  29,  and  C.  Baptismi 
vicem  (34.)  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

Passage  from  Cyprian  really  Epist.  ad  lubaianum  (73.),  n.  22. 
»  Luke  23,  43. 

*  Rom.  10,  10. 


t. 


!> 


r 


I 


f 


despised ;  nor  can  it  in  any  way  be  called  turning  of  the  heart  to  God, 
when  the  sacrament  of  God  is  despised."  ^ — So,  here  you  have  it, 
that  not  only  suffering,  but  also  faith  and  contrition  confer  remission, 
where  the  sacrament  is  not  despised  as  is  shown  in  the  case  of  that 
thief,  who  not  by  suffering,  but  by  faith  was  saved  without  baptism. 
— But  some  say  that  Augustine  retracted  this.  He  did  indeed  retract 
his  example^  but  not  his  opinion.  For  he  says:  "When  I  said  in 
the  fourth  book  that  suffering  can  take  the  place  of  baptism,  it  was 
not  enough  that  I  mentioned  the  example  of  the  thief,  because  it  is 
uncertain  that  he  was  not  baptized."  It  is  established  therefore  that 
without  baptism  some  are  justified  and  saved.  Wherefore  Ambrose^ 
on  Valentinian :  "  'My  bowels  are  in  pain,'  to  employ  prophetic 
eloquence,  because  I  have  lost  him  whom  I  was  about  to  regen- 
erate ;  yet  truly  he  did  not  lose  the  grace,  which  he  sought." 

But  there  seems  a  contradiction  to  these  views  in  what  the 
Lord  says  :^  "Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  holy 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven." — For  if  this 
is  generally  true,  the  views  expressed  above  do  not  seem  to  be  true. 
But  this  is  to  be  understood  as  applied  to  those  who  can  be  baptized 
and  scorn  it ;  or  else  it  is  to  be  understood  thus :  unless  a  man  be  born 
again  of  water  and  of  the  holy  Spirit,  that  is,  by  that  regeneration, 
which  is  accomplished  through  water  and  the  holy  Spirit,  he  will  not 
be  saved.  This  regeneration  moreover  is  accomplished  not  only 
through  baptism,  but  also  through  penance  and  blood.  Wherefore, 
the  authority^  tells  us,  for  this  reason  the  Apostle  said  that  "the 
foundation  of  baptism  is  plural,  because  there  is  baptism  in  water, 
in  blood,  and  in  penance."  Moreover  he  does  not  say  that  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism  can  be  performed  only  in  water,  but  that  its  virtue, 
that  is,  sanctification,  can  be  given  not  only  through  water,  but 
through  blood  or  inner  penance.  Reason  indeed  urges  this.  For  if 
baptism  suffices  for  infants  who  are  not  able  to  believe,  much  more 
does  faith  suffice  for  adults  willing  but  not  able  to  be  baptized. 


*  August.,  ibid.  c.  25.  n.  32,  and  Can.  cit.  §4. 

»  Lib.  II.  Retract,  c.  18.    C£.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  De  Sacram.  p.  VI.  c.  7. 
'  De  Obitu  Valentin,  n.  29;  cites  from  Jer.  4,  19. 
« John  3,  5. 

^  Glossa  in  Hebr.  6,  i  (in  Lyranus.)     Opinion  that  of  Rabanus,  on  this 
passage. 


lOO 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  IV 


lOI 


Wherefore  Augustine^ :  **Do  you  ask,  which  is  greater :  faith  or 
water;  I  have  no  doubt  what  I  should  respond:  faith.  If  therefore 
that  which  is  less  can  sanctify,  does  not  that  which  is  greater? 
that  is  faith,  of  which  Christ  says:  'Whoever  shall  believe  on  me, 
though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live.'  2 — But  some  say  that  no 
adult  believes  on  Christ  or  has  charity  without  baptism,  unless  he 
sheds  his  blood  for  the  Lord,  supporting  their  view  with  the  sub- 
joined testimonies.  Augustine''  says:  "From  the  time  that  the 
Saviour  said;  'Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  holy 
Spirit'  etc.,  without  the  sacrament  of  baptism  no  one,  except  those 
who  shed  blood  in  the  Church,  can  receive  eternal  life."  The  same: 
**We  believe  that  no  catechumen  although  dying  in  good  works,  has 
eternal  life,  except  he  die  in  martyrdom  whereby  the  whole  sacra- 
ments of  baptism  are  completed."  The  same:  "We  believe  that  the 
way  of  salvation  is  only  for  the  baptized." — But  the  statements  he 
makes  less  fully  here  he  supplements  in  the  chapters  quoted  above ; 
and  for  that  reason  these  passages  are  to  be  thus  understood,  that 
only  those  who  have  time  to  be  baptized  and  are  not,  are  excepted 
from  salvation.  For  if  anyone  having  faith  and  charity  wishes  to  be 
baptized,  and  cannot  because  prevented  by  necessity,  the  goodness  of 
the  Almighty  will  supply  what  has  been  lacking  in  the  sacrament.  For 
while  he  can  perform  it,  he  is  bound,  unless  he  do  perform  it; 
but  when  he  is  not  able,  but  wishes  to  do  so,  God,  who  has  not  bound 
his  power  to  sacraments,  does  not  impute  it  to  him.  But  that  there 
is  invisible  sanctification  in  some  without  the  visible  sacrament^ 
Augustine  clearly  teaches,  saying  in  his  commentary  on  Leviticus,* 
"Invisible  sanctification  exists  and  benefits  some  without  visible 
sacraments ;  but  visible  sanctification,  which  comes  from  the  visible 
sacraments,  can  be  present,  but  cannot  benefit  without  the  invisible. 
However  the  visible  sacrament  is  not  for  that  reason  to  be  despised, 
because  the  one  who  despises  it,  cannot  be  invisibly  sanctified. 
Hence  Cornelius  and  those  with  him  were  baptized,  although  al- 

*  Passage  in  Augustine  not  found,  but  a  like  opinion  in  Hugh,  I.  De  Sacram, 
p.  IX.  c.  5. 

*John  II,  25. 

»  (Fulgent),  de  Fide  ad  Petrum.  c.  3.  n.  43.  Following  passage  is  in  libro 
Gennadii  de  Ecclesiast.  Dogmat.  c.  41,  and  C.  CaUchumenum  (37.)  de  Consecrat. 
dist.  4.    Third  passage,  ibid.,  a  little  below. 

*  Lib.  III.  Quaestion.  in  Pentateuch,  q.  84.  (Levit.  21,  15.) 


. 


ready  sanctified  by  the  holy  Spirit.^  Nor  is  the  visible  sanctification 
to  be  judged  superfluous,  because  the  invisible  preceded  it.  There- 
fore the  invisible  sanctification  without  the  visible  can  exist  and 
benefit ;  but  the  visible  which  is  caused  by  the  sacrament  only,  is  not 
able  to  benefit  without  the  invisible,  since  therein  is  its  whole  utility. 
Visible  baptism  did  not  benefit  Simon  Magus,^  because  the  invisible 
was  lacking;  but  it  benefited  those  in  whom  the  invisible  was  pre- 
sent." Nor  is  another's  faith  so  valuable  to  an  infant,  as  his  own  to 
an  adult.  For  the  faith  of  the  Church  does  not  suffice  for  infants 
without  the  sacrament,  because,  if  they  die  without  baptism,  even 
when  they  are  being  brought  to  baptism,  they  will  be  damned,  as  is 
proved  by  many  authorities  of  the  saints ;  on  this  point  let  one  suffice. 
Augustine^ :  "Maintain  firmly  that  infants  who  either  begin  to  live  in 
their  mothers'  wombs,  and  die  there,  or  born  of  their  mothers  pass 
from  this  life  without  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  must  be  punished 
with  eternal  torture,  because  although  they  have  no  sins  of  their 
own  doing,  yet  they  have  inherited  original  sin  from  their  conception 
in  carnal  concupiscence."  And  as  infants  who  die  without  baptism, 
are  numbered  with  the  infidels,  so  those  who  are  baptized  are  called 
faithful  and  are  not  separated  from  the  fellowship  of  the  faithful, 
when  the  Church  prays  for  the  faithful  dead.  They  are  faithful, 
therefore,  not  on  account  of  their  own  virtue,  but  on  account  of  the 
sacrament  of  faith.  Wherefore  Augustine  :^  "An  infant,  although  he 
has  not  yet  that  faith  which  depends  upon  the  will  of  the  believers, 
nevertheless  has  faith  through  the  sacrament  of  that  faith,  that  is, 
baptism ;  for  as  the  response  is  made  that  he  believes,  so  also  he  is 
called  faithful,  not  because  he  assents  to  the  truth  by  his  own  judg- 
ment, but  because  he  receives  the  sacrament  of  that  truth." 

V.     What  is  the  profit  of  baptism  to  those  who  come  with  faith. 

We  are  often  asked  concerning  those  who  are  already  sanctified 
by  the  Spirit,  and  come  to  baptism  with  faith  and  charity,  what 


*  Acts  10,  44  f. 
» Acts  8,  13  f. 

»  (Fulgent.)  De  Fide  ad  Petrum.  c.  27.  n.  70,  and  C.  Firmissime  tene  (3.), 
de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

*  Epist.  98.  (alias  23.)  ad  Bonifac.  n.  10,  and  C.  NihU  est  aliud  (76.),  de 
Consecrat.  dist.  4. 


X 


I02 


APPENDIX 


baptism  confers  on  them.    For  it  seems  to  offer  them  nothing,  since 
they  are  already  justified  by  faith  and  contrition,  and  their  sins  are 
already  remitted. — To  this  we  can  rightly  reply  that  they  are  cer- 
tainly justified  by  faith  and  contrition,  that  is,  purged  from  the  stain 
of  sin,  and  absolved  from  the  debt  of  eternal  punishment,  but  as  yet 
they  are  held  to  temporal  satisfaction,  by  which  penitents  are  bound 
in  the  Church.    When  however  they  receive  baptism,  they  are  both 
cleansed  from  their  sins,  if  they  have  committed  any  in  the  interim 
after  conversion,  and  are  absolved  from  exterior  satisfaction;  and 
helping  grace  and  every  virtue  are  increased  in  them,  so  that  they 
can  then  truly  be  called  neiv  men.    The  incentive  to  sin  is  also  les- 
sened still  more  in  them.     Therefore  Jerome^  says,  that  the  faith, 
which  makes  them  faithful,  is  given  or  nourished  in  the  waters  of 
baptism;  because  it  is  there  given  sometimes  to  one  who  does  not 
have  it  yet,  and  again  it  is  given  to  one  who  has  it  that  he  may  have 
it  more  fully.2    This  we  must  also  understand  of  others. 

VI.     JVhat  is  remitted  in  the  baptism  of  a  just  person. 

He  who  therefore  comes  to  baptism  clean  is  there  made  cleaner, 

and  to  the  one  who  already  has  faith,  it  is  there  given  more  fully. 

That   every  external   satisfaction   is   there  discharged,   Ambrose^ 

shows  in  his  comment  on  this  passage :  "For  the  gifts  and  calling  of 

God  are  without  repentance,"  ^  saying:  "The  grace  of  God  in  baptism 

does  not  require  groaning  or  lamentations,  or  any  work,  but  forgives 

all  freely."    This  certainly  must  be  understood  of  external  groaning 

or  lamentations ;  for  without  the  interior  groaning  and  lamentations, 

no  adult  is  renewed ;  but  exterior  satisfactions  and  afflictions,  that  is! 

the  mourning  garments  of  penitents,  are  thereby  remitted.    Baptism, 

therefore,  bestows  much,  even  on  one  already  justified  by  faith; 

because  he  comes  to  baptism,  just  as  the  branch  was  brought  by  the 

dove  into  the  ark ;  before,  he  was  within  in  the  judgment  of  God,  but 

now  he  is  within,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Church  also.    But  since  sin 

is  forgiven  in  baptism,  and  exterior  satisfaction  is  not  enjoined, 

>  This  passage  not  found  in  Jerome. 
*  Matt.  25,  29. 

3  (Among  his  works.)    Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Rom.  11,  29,  and  C.  Sine 
poemUntta  (99.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4. 
*Rom.  II,  29. 


\M 


DISTINCTION  IV 


103 


< 


someone  may  ask  why  the  punishment  of  death,  to  which  we  are 
condemned  for  sin,  is  not  taken  away.  The  saints  declare  this  is  so, 
"because  if  men  were  freed  from  that  punishment  by  baptism,  they 
would  think  that,  and  not  the  eternal  kingdom  the  reward  of  baptism. 
Therefore  the  guilt  of  sin  being  removed,  temporal  punishment  still 
remains,  in  order  that  men  may  seek  that  life  more  eagerly,  which 
will  be  free  from  all  punishments."  *  Therefore  death  remains,  that 
the  faithful  may  have  a  cause  for  conflict,  and  an  occasion  for  con- 
quest, who  would  not  conquer  if  they  did  not  fight;  nor  would 
they  fight  if  in  baptism  they  were  made  immortal. 

VII.     Of  what  thing  {res)  the  baptism,  which  a  just  person  receives, 
may  be  the  sacrament. 

If  someone  asks  of  what  thing  that  baptism  may  be  a  sacra- 
ment,2  which  is  given  to  one  already  righteous,  we  say  that  it  is  a 
sacrament  of  that  which  has  preceded  it,  that  is,  of  the  remission 
already  granted  through  faith,  and  of  the  remission  of  temporal 
punishment  or  of  sin,  if  any  has  been  committed  in  the  interim,  and 
of  the  newness  of  life  and  of  all  grace  there  offered.  It  is  in  fact  the 
sign  of  everything  of  which  it  is  the  cause.  Nor  should  you  wonder 
that  sometimes  the  thing  precedes  the  sacrament,  since  it  sometimes 
also  follows  long  after,  as  in  the  case  of  those  who  come  insincerely, 
whom  baptism  begins  to  benefit  when  they  afterwards  do  penance; 
in  these  cases  baptism  was  the  sacrament  of  the  sanctification  they 
have  by  doing  penance. — But  if  they  never  do  penance,  nor  aban- 
don their  deceit,  of  what  thing  (res)  is  the  baptism  they  receive 
the  sacrament?  We  can  say:  of  the  thing  which  would  have  taken 
place,  if  their  wickedness  had  not  prevented  it. 

We  are  often  asked,  if  grace  is  given  to  infants  in  baptism, 
by  which,  when  they  reach  the  time  of  exercising  free  will,  they  can 
will  and  do  good  works.^  As  for  adults  indeed  who  worthily  receive 
the  sacrament  we  cannot .  doubt  that  they  receive  operative  and 
cooperative  grace,  which  withdraws  from  them,  if  they  afterwards, 
of  their  own  free  will,  sin  mortally,  and  because  of  their  sin  destroy 
the  grace  bestowed.     Wherefore  they  are  said  to  offend  the  holy 


*  Isidore,  I.  Sent.  c.  22.  n.  3;  see  also  Augustine,  XIII.  de  Civ.  Dei,  c.  4. 

2  Sacrament  in  the  sense  of  sign. 

'  See  Rom.  9,  16;  II.  Cor.  6,  i ;  below,  Hebrews  10,  29. 


I04 


APPENDIX 


I  ^ 


Spirit  and  make  him  flee  from  them. — But  as  for  infants,  who  do  not 
yet  employ  reason,  the  question  is  whether  in  baptism  they  receive 
grace,  by  which  when  they  come  to  later  years  they  can  will  and  do 
good  works.  It  seems  that  they  do  not  receive  it,  because  that  grace 
is  charity  and  faith  which  prepares  and  supports  the  will.  But  who 
has  said  that  they  have  received  faith  and  charity?  If  they  do  not 
receive  grace,  by  which  they  can  do  good  works  when  they  are 
grown ;  then  the  grace  given  them  at  this  age  in  baptism  does  not 
suffice,  nor  by  it  now  can  they  be  good,  unless  another  grace  is  added ; 
if  it  is  not  added,  it  is  not  their  fault,  because  they  have  been  justified 
from  sin. — Some  think  operative  and  cooperative  grace  is  given  to 
all  infants  in  baptism  as  a  gift,  not  for  use,  that  when  they  come  to 
greater  age.  they  may  receive  the  use  of  the  gift,  unless  by  free  will 
they  destroy  the  use  of  the  gift  by  sin;  so  it  is  by  their  fault,  not 
from  the  failure  of  grace,  that  they  become  evil ;  who  although  they 
are  able  to  have  good  habits  by  the  gift  of  God,  have  refused  them 
through  free  will,  and  have  chosen  evil  habits.^ 


»For  the  solution,  which  the  Lombard  does  not  give,  see  Bonaventura, 
Comment,  p.  II.  a.  2.  q.  i.  2. 


U 


( 
N 


{^ 


VI 


U 


Distinction  V 

I.     That  baptism  is  equally  good  when  administered  by  a  good,  or  a 
bad  man. 

Next  we  must  understand  that  the  sacrament  of  baptism  may  be 
given  by  good  and  by  bad  ministers  just  as  it  is  received  by  good  and 
bad  men.  Nor  is  the  baptism  better  which  is  given  by  a  better  man, 
nor  less  good,  which  is  given  by  a  less  good  man ;  nor  evil,  which  is 
given  by  an  evil  man;  nor  is  a  greater  gift  given  in  baptism  by 
a  good  man,  nor  a  less  given  in  baptism  by  an  evil  man,  but  equally, 
because  the  gift  is  not  of  man,  but  of  God.  All  of  this  is  taught 
by  the  following  testimonies.  Augustine^  says :  "For  baptism  derives 
its  character  from  him  through  whose  power  it  is  given,  not  from 
him  through  whose  ministry  it  is  given."  The  same:  "Certainly 
it  can  happen,  that  some  may  have  true  baptism  and  not  have  the 
true  faith."  Also:  "If  among  good  ministers,  one  is  better  than 
another,  but  the  baptism  which  is  given  by  the  better  one,  is 
not  better;  so  the  baptism  is  in  no  wise  bad,  which  is  given  by  a 
wicked  man,  because  the  same  baptism  is  given.  And  therefore 
by  disparate  ministers  the  gift  of  God  is  equal,  because  it  is  not 
theirs  but  his."  The  same^:  "When  a  wicked  man  baptizes,  the 
baptism  which  is  given  is  the  same,  nor  is  it  unequal  on  account  of 
unequal  ministers  but  like  and  equal,  because  of  this  word :  'He  it  is 
that  baptizeth.'  "  The  same^ :  "I  say  and  we  all  say,  that  they 
through  whom  baptism  is  administered  ought  to  be  just;  the  min- 
isters of  such  a  judge  ought  to  be  just.  Let  these  ministers  be  just, 
if  they  will;  if,  however,  they  who  sit  in  the  chair  of  Moses  do  not 
wish  to  be  just,  my  master,  that  is  Christ,  makes  me  safe,  for  of  him 
the  holy  Spirit  says :  'He  it  is  that  baptizeth.'  "  The  same* :  "Whom 
Judas  has  baptized,  Christ  has  baptized.    If  therefore  a  drunkard,  a 


'  In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  5.  n.  6,  and  C.  Baptismus  talis  (26.),  de  Consecrat. 
dist.  4. 

*  In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  6.  n.  8,  and  C.  Cum  haptizat  mains  (27.),  de  Consecrat. 
dist.  4.     (See  John  i,  33.) 

3  Ibid.  tr.  5.  n.  15,  and  C.  Baptismus  talis,  (26.),  ibid.  §3. 

*  Ibid.  n.  18,  and  C.  Dedit  Baptismum  (46.),  c.  i.  q.  i.  §1. 

105 


io6 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  V 


murderer,  an  adulterer  has  baptized  anyone,  if  it  was  Christ's  bap- 
tism, Christ  has  baptized.  I  do  not  fear  the  aduUerer,  nor  the 
murderer,  because  I  give  heed  to  the  dove,  who  says  to  me:  'He  it 
is  that  baptizeth.*  "  The  same^ :  "A  murderer  gave  the  baptism  of 
Christ;  which  sacrament  is  so  holy  that  it  is  not  defiled  when  a 
murderer  is  ministering."  The  same^:  "If  in  any  heresy  or  schism 
anyone  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  holy 
Spirit  has  received  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  he  has  received  the 
entire  sacrament ;  but  he  will  not  have  salvation,  which  is  the  virtue 
of  the  sacrament,  if  he  receives  the  sacrament  itself  outside  the 
catholic  Church.  He  ought  therefore  to  return  to  the  Church,  not 
that  he  may  again  receive  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  which  no  one 
ought  in  any  case  to  repeat,  but  that  in  the  catholic  fellowship,  he 
may  receive  Hfe.  For  baptism  cannot  profit  outside  the  Church. 
There  only  baptism  can  benefit  him  where  mercy  can  benefit  him, 
that  is,  in  the  Church."  So  Isidore^ :  'The  Roman  pontiflF  does  not 
judge  that  it  is  a  man  who  baptizes,  but  the  spirit  of  God,  who  sup- 
plies the  grace  of  baptism,  even  though  he  who  baptizes  may  be  a 
pagan."  Whence  you  can  easily  see  that  true  baptism  is  given  to 
good  and  to  evil,  both  by  good  and  by  evil,  and  yet  it  is  equally  holy 
and  its  gift  equal  for  the  good,  whether  they  be  baptized  by  good 
men,  or  by  evil : 

II.     Of  the  power  and  the  ministry  of  baptism. 

Because  they  have  only  the  ministry,  not  the  power  of  baptism ; 
for  the  power  Christ  retains  for  himself.  Which  John  knew  when  he 
saw  the  dove  descending  upon  Christ.  Wherefore  Augustine:* 
"What  did  John  the  Baptist  know?  The  Lord.  What  did  he  not 
know?  that  the  power  of  the  Lord's  baptism  would  not  be  given  by 
the  Lord  to  any  man,  but  the  ministry  clearly  was  to  be  given :  the 


107 


*  Ibid.  n.  19.  and  in  the  same  canon  §2. 

*  Fulgent,  de  Fide  ad  Petrum,  c.  3.  n.  43. 

« Can.  Romanus  pontifex  (23.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4.  Passage  cannot  be 
found  in  Isidore,  but  in  Egbert  of  York,  I.  Poenitent.  p.  I.  c.  7,  and  Alger,  III.  de 
Sacramento  c.  6. — Note  below  that  the  last  proposition  of  the  chapter  is  inter- 
rupted by  the  division  of  chapters. 

*  In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  5,  n.  11,  and  C.  Baptismus  talis  (26.),  de  Consecrat 
dist.  4.  §1.    (See  John  i,  33.) 


^ 


power  was  to  be  given  by  the  Lord  to  no  one,  but  the  ministry  to 
good  and  evil.  Let  the  dove  not  dread  the  ministry  of  the  wicked, 
let  him  consider  the  power  of  the  Lord.  What  does  a  wicked  min- 
ister do  for  you,  where  the  Lord  is  good  ?"  "  'Neither  he  that  plant- 
eth  is  any  thing,  nor  he  that  watereth;  but  God  that  giveth  the 
increase.'  If  the  minister  is  proud,  he  is  reckoned  with  the  devil ;  but 
he  does  not  defile  the  gift  of  Christ,  because  that  which  flows  through 
him,  is  pure.  Through  a  stony  channel  the  water  flows  into  gardens ; 
in  the  stony  channel  nothing  is  produced  but  the  garden  bears 
very  many  fruits."  * — Not  only  good  men  therefore,  but  also  wicked, 
have  the  ministry  of  baptizing,  but  neither  has  the  power  of 
baptism.  "For^  Christ  gave  the  ministry  to  his  servants,  but 
the  power  he  himself  retained,  which  if  he  had  wished  he  could 
have  given  to  his  servants,  that  the  servant  might  give  his  own 
baptism  as  if  by  his  own  power.  And  he  could  have  appointed 
his  power  to  some  servant  or  some  servants,  so  that  there  would  be 
as  much  power  in  the  baptism  of  a  servant  as  there  is  in  the  baptism 
of  the  Lord;  but  he  would  not,  lest  a  servant  might  put  hope  in  a 
servant.  A  servant  baptizes  as  a  minister,  the  Lord  baptizes  as  one 
with  power;  if  he  should  give  the  power  to  servants,  so  that  it  would 
be  theirs  as  it  was  the  Lord's,  there  would  be  as  many  baptisms  as 
servants,  so  that,  just  as  the  baptism  of  John  was  spoken  of,  so  would 
the  baptism  of  Peter  or  of  Paul  be  spoken  of.  That  this  might  not 
occur,  the  Lord  retained  for  himself  the  power  of  baptism,  but  he 
gave  the  ministry  to  his  servants.  If  therefore  a  servant  says  that 
he  baptizes ;  he  says  rightly,  but  he  baptizes  only  as  a  minister,  and 
therefore  it  makes  no  difference  whether  a  good  or  an  evil  man 
baptizes."  "Therefore  also  no  one  says  *my  baptism,'  although  he 
says  'my  Gospel,'  'my  prudence,'  yet  these  things  are  from  God.  In 
these  there  is  a  difference :  for  one  man  works  better  than  another  in 
evangelizing,  and  one  is  more  prudent  than  another;  but  it  cannot 
be  said  that  one  is  more  or  less  baptized  than  another,  or  that  one  is 
baptized  by  an  inferior  or  by  a  greater."  ^ 


1  Augustine,  ibid.  n.  15,  and  C.  Si  iustus  (30.),  c.  i.  q.  i ;  quotes  I.  Cor.  3,  7. 
'  Ibid.  n.  7.  (much  omitted  by  the  Lombard.) 

*  August.,  V.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  14.  n.  16,  and  C.  Cum 
tantum  (47.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  4.  §1. 


APPENDIX 

III.     What  zvas  the  pozver  of  baptism,  which  Christ  could  have  given 
to  his  servants  and  did  not  givef 

Here  we  are  asked,  what  was  that  power  of  baptism,  which 
Christ  retained  for  himself  and  which  he  could  have  given  his  serv- 
ants.— This  is,  as  very  many  assert,  the  power  of  remitting  sins  in 
baptism. — But  the  power  of  remitting  sins  which  is  in  God,  is  God. 
Therefore  some  say  that  he  could  not  have  given  this  power  to  any 
of  his  servants,  because  he  could  have  given  to  no  one  to  be  what  he 
himself  is,  or  to  have  the  essence  which  he  himself  has,  for  to  him 
to  be  is  to  have  power.  They  say  then:  if  he  could  give  this  power 
to  anyone,  he  could  empower  him  to  create  creatures,  because  the 
latter  is  no  greater  power  than  the  former.* — To  which  we  can  say 
that  he  could  give  them  the  power  of  remitting  sins.  Yet  not  that 
same  power  by  which  he  is  powerful,  but  created  power,  by  which 
the  servant  could  remit  sins;  not  however  as  the  author  of  remis- 
sion, but  as  the  minister  and  not  without  God  as  the  author;  just 
as  in  the  ministry  the  servant  has  power  to  sanctify  externally,  so 
in  the  ministry  he  would  have  power  to  cleanse  inwardly;  and  just 
as  he  did  this  cleansing  with  God  the  author  who  works  the  external 
cleansing  with  him,  so  he  would  cleanse  inwardly  with  God  as  the 
author,  who  would  use  his  word  as  a  form  of  ministry.  So  also  God 
could  create  anything  through  anyone,  not  through  the  man  as 
author,  but  as  minister,  with  whom  and  in  whom  he  would  work; 
just  as  in  our  good  works,  he  works  and  we :  neither  he  alone,  nor 
we  alone,  but  he  with  us  and  in  us,  and  yet  we  are  his  ministers  in 
accomplishing  these  good  works,  not  authors.  Thus  he  could  have 
given  the  servant  the  power  of  remitting  sins  in  baptism,  that  is, 
that  in  the  inward  cleansing  the  servant  should  work  with  the  Lord ; 
not  the  servant  without  the  Lord,  nor  the  Lord  without  the  servant, 
but  the  Lord  with  the  servant  and  in  the  servant,  just  as  in  the 
outward  ministry  the  Lord  works  with  the  servant  and  in  the 
servant.  Wherefore  both  the  Lord  and  the  servant  are  said  to 
sanctify;  but  the  Lord  by  invisible  grace,  the  servant  by  the  visible 
sacrament.  So  Augustine  in  his  commentary  on  Leviticus^:  "The 
Lord  says:  *I  the  Lord,  who  sanctify'  ^\  and  concerning  Moses  also 


*  Cf.  Glossa  apud  Lyranum  loan.  14,  12. 
'  Lib.  in.  Quaestion.  in  Pentateuch,  q.  84. 
*Levit.  21,  15. 


i 


%\  I 


DISTINCTION  V 


109 


it  is  said :  *And  thou  shalt  sanctify  him.*  ^  But  Moses  sanctifies  with 
visible  sacraments  through  the  ministry,  but  the  Lord  with  invisible 
grace  through  the  Spirit,  wherein  is  the  whole  fruit  of  the  visible 
sacraments.  Without  this  sanctification  visible  sacraments  profit 
nothing" — If  anyone  can  explain  this  better,  I  am  not  envious.^ 


*  Exod.  29,  24. 

^This  opinion  is  not  commonly  accepted.     See  Bonaventura,  Comments 


' 


a.  3. 


{I 


' 


i 


\ 


/ 


Distinction  VI 


PART  1 


I.  Who  are  permitted  to  baptise. 

Let  us  now  further  consider  who  are  permitted  to  baptize.  On 
this  point  Isidore  says^ :  "It  is  estabUshed  that  baptism  is  admin- 
istered only  by  priests,  and  it  is  not  lawful  even  for  deacons  to  per- 
form the  ministry  of  it  without  a  bishop  or  priest,  unless,  when  they 
are  absent  at  a  distance,  extreme  necessity  of  weakness  requires  it, 
and  then  it  is  also  allowable  for  the  faithful  laity  to  baptize."  From 
the  fourth  Council  of  Carthage  i^  "Let  no  woman,  no  matter  how 
holy,  presume  to  baptize,  unless  necessity  compels  her." 

II.  //  those  baptised  by  heretics  must  be  rebaptised. 

As  for  those  who  were  baptized  by  heretics,  we  are  often  asked 
'whether  they  should  be  rebaptized. — To  this  we  say  briefly  that 
whoever  it  is  who  baptizes,  if  he  follows  the  form  given  by  Christ, 
he  gives  true  baptism ;  therefore  he  who  receives  it  ought  not  be 
rebaptized.  Wherefore  Bede^ :  "If  anyone,  whether  he  be  heretic  or 
rschismatic  or  criminal  baptizes  in  the  confession  of  the  holy  Trinity, 
it  is  not  well  that  he  who  was  baptized,  should  be  rebaptized  by  good 
Catholics,  lest  the  confession  and  invocation  of  the  Trinity  seem 
to  be  made  of  no  effect."  Also  Augustine** :  "Although  the  baptism 
of  heretics,  that  is  of  those  who  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  holy  Spirit,  be  the  same  as  that  of  the 
catholic  Church,  yet  those  persons  who  were  baptized  outside  the 


*  Lib.  II.  de  Ecclesiast.  Officiis,  c.  25.  n.  9;  C.  Constat,  baptisma  (19.),  de 
Consecrat.  dist.  4. 

*  Num.  99  and  100;  C.  Mulier  (20.),  ibid. 

*  Homil.  aestiv.  de  Temp,  in  festo  Invent.  S.  Crucis;  C.  Sive  haereticus  (51.), 
ibid. 

*  Dialogus  quaestion.  65.  q.  59.  (among  his  works);  C.  Quamvis  unum  (29.), 
ibid.    See  II.  Tim.  3,  5. 

no 


DISTINCTION  VI 


III 


/'I 

I" 


church  do  not  receive  baptism  unto  salvation,  but  unto  destruction, 
having  the  form  of  the  sacrament,  but  denying  its  virtue;  and  there- 
fore the  Church  does  not  rebaptize  them,  because  they  were  baptized 
in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  and  that  is  the  form  of  the  sacrament." 
Also^ :  "To  rebaptize  a  heretic  who  has  received  these  signs  of  sanc- 
tification  is  certainly  a  sin;  to  rebaptize  a  Catholic,  the  most  mon- 
strous wrong." — From  these  authorities  we  can  clearly  gather,  that 
even  those  who  have  been  baptized  by  heretics,  when  the  form  given 
by  Christ  has  been  preserved,  are  not  to  be  rebaptized,  but  only 
reconciled  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  that  they  may  receive  the 
holy  Spirit,  and  in  token  of  detestation  of  the  heretics. 

There  are  however  some  of  the  doctors,^  as  Cyprian  and  certain 
others,  who  seem  to  say  that  baptism  cannot  be  administered  by 
heretics,  and  that  those  who  are  said  to  have  been  baptized  by  them 
are  to  be  rebaptized  when  they  come  into  the  Church. — But  this  is 
true  of  those  heretics  who  presume  to  baptize  without  the  form  of 
the  Church.  Cyprian,^  however,  herein  seems  to  have  deviated  from 
the  truth,  when  he  says  concerning  a  heretic:  "In  what  way  can  he 
sanctify  water  when  he  is  unclean,  and  when  the  holy  Spirit  is  not 
with  him ;  since  the  Lord  says  in  the  Law* :  'Whatever  things  an 
unclean  person  touches,  shall  be  unclean'?  Who  can  give  what  he 
himself  has  not?"  Augustine  intimates  that  he  said  this  from 
ignorance^'^ :  "As  to  the  glorious  martyr  Cyprian,  who  did  not  wish 
to  recognize  the  baptism  conferred  among  heretics  or  schismatics, 
since  he  detested  them  exceedingly,  he  attained  to  the  triumph  of 
martyrdom  by  such  great  merits,  that  this  shadow  was  dispelled  by 
the  light  of  the  charity  in  which  he  excelled,  and  if  anything  needed 
to  be  purged  away,  it  was  removed  by  the  scythe  of  suffering.  Nor 
are  we  better  therefore  than  Cyprian,  because  we  recognize  the  truth 
of  baptism  and  the  iniquity  of  heretics,  just  as  we  are  not  better  than 
Peter,  because  we  do  not  compel  the  Gentiles  to  judaize." 


1  August.,  Epist.  23  (alias  203.)  adMaximin.  n.  2;  C.  Rebaptizare  haereticum 
(108.)  ibid. 

*  Cf.  August.,  VI.  and  VII.  contra  Donatistas,  and  other  doctors. 
»  Epist.  ad  lubaiantun  eiusque  episc.  Acta  etc. 

*  Num.  19,  22. 

'  De  Unico  Baptismo  contra  Petilian.  c.  13.  n.  22. 


112 


APPENDIX 


PART   II 


III.     That  no  one  may  be  baptized  in  his  mother  s  womb. 

We  must  also  understand,  *'that  although  immersion  is  per- 
formed three  times  on  account  of  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity,  yet  it 
is  counted  only  one  baptism."  i— We  are  also  not  to  be  ignorant  that 
no  one  can  be  baptized  in  his  mother's  womb,  even  if  the  mother 
be  baptized.  Wherefore  Isidores :  'Those  who  are  in  their  mothers' 
wombs  cannot  be  baptized,  because  he  who  is  not  yet  born  according 
to  Adam,  cannot  be  bom  again  according  to  Christ,  nor  can  we  speak 
of  the  re-birth  of  one,  whose  birth  has  not  preceded  it."  Also, 
Augustine"* :  "No  one  can  be  born  again  before  he  is  born." 

But  if  Jeremiah^  and  John  the  Baptist  be  cited  against  this 
opinion,  because  they  were  said  to  be  sanctified  from  the  womb,  as 
also  some  think  was  true  of  Jacob ;  we  say  that  if  they  there  received 
sanctification  as  inward  cleansing,  it  must  be  held  among  the  mir- 
acles of  divine  power,  as  Augustine  says,^  speaking  ambiguously 
about  this:  "If,"  he  says,  "the  use  of  reason  and  will  was  so  far 
advanced  in  that  boy  that  within  the  mother's  womb  he  could  already 
know  and  believe  a  thing  that  only  age  makes  possible  in  other  chil- 
dren, it  must  be  held  among  the  miracles  of  divine  power,  not  taken 
as  typical  of  human  nature.  For  when  God  willed  it,  even  an  ass 
spoke."«  Also^:  "Concerning  Jeremiah  it  is  said:  ^Before  thou 
camest  out  of  the  womb,  I  sanctified  thee' ;  but  that  sanctification  by 
which  we  are  made  the  temple  of  God,  is  only  for  the  reborn." 
"  Tor  unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  holy  Spirit, 
he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.'  No  one  is  born  again, 
unless  he  is  already  born."^  "Wherefore  this  sanctification  can  be 
received  according  to  predestination."  »— Here  he  seems  to  speak 


ibid. 


» Jerome,  II.  Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Eph.  (4,  5.);  C.  Eodem  modo  (81.), 

2  Lib.  I.  Sent.  c.  22.  n.  5;  C.  Qui  in  maternis  (115.),  ibid. 

3  Epist.  187.  (alias  57.)  ad  Dardan.  c.  9.  n.  31. 

*  Jer.  I,  5;  (concerning  John  the  Baptist)— Luke  i,  15. 

*  Epist.  cit.  c.  7.  n.  24. 

•  Numbers  22,  28. 

'  Augustine,  Epist.  cit.  c.  10.  n.  2,2  \  see  Jer.  1,5. 
«  Epist.  cit.  c.  10.  n.  33;  see  John  3,  5. 

•  Epist.  cit.  c.  12.  n.  37. 


If 


/• 


i     •   >. 


s 


DISTINCTION  VI  113 

doubtfully,  when  he  also  says^ :  "It  is  not  said  that  the  infant  believed 
in  tht  wornb,  but  that  he  leaped;  nor  did  Elisabeth  say:  he  leaped  in 
faith,  but,  he  leaped  in  my  womb.  And  this  sanctification  could  be 
the  sign  of  greatness  recognized  by  the  older  person,  but  not  compre- 
hended by  the  child.—He  speaks  without  assertion  of  this  sanctifi- 
cation, not  defining  just  how  the  sanctification  is  to  be  understood, 
whether  it  be  the  sign  of  something  to  come,  or  the  truth  of  the  justi- 
fication accomplished  by  the  Spirit.  But  it  is  better  that  we  say  that 
these  two  (Jeremiah  and  John)  were  justified  in  the  womb  contrary 
to  the  common  law,  and  aided  by  grace  all  sins  were  forgiven  them; 
this  is  also  taught  by  many  testimonies  of  the  saints. 

IV.     Whether  it  be  baptism,  when  the  words  are  incorrectly  pro- 
nounced. 

Moreover  we  are  often  asked  if  there  be  baptism,  when  the 
words  are  incorrectly  pronounced.— On  this  point  Zacharias2  writes 
to  Boniface:  "Your  messengers  have  reported  to  me  that  there  has 
been  a  priest  in  the  same  province,  who  was  completely  ignorant  of 
the  Latin  language,  and  when  he  baptized,  not  knowing  how  to 
speak  Latin,  he  would  say  brokenly :  'Baptizo  te  in  nomine  Patria  et 
Filia  et  Spiritu  sancta';  and  on  this  account  you  have  considered 
rebaptizing.  But  if  he  who  baptized,  did  not  introduce  error  or 
heresy,  but  by  mere  ignorance  of  Roman  speech,  has  spoken  the 
language  brokenly  in  baptizing ;  we  cannot  agree  that  those  whom  he 
baptized  should  be  baptized  again." 

Besides,  we  ought  to  know  that  "for  those  persons,  about  whose 
baptism  there  is  no  knowledge  among  the  members  of  their  family  or 
among  their  neighbors,  as  to  who  baptized  them,  something  must  be 
done  that  they  may  be  re-born  lest  they  perish ;  in  which  case  reason 
allows  that  what  cannot  be  proved  to  have  been  done,  may  seem  to 
be  repeated.  It  seems  that  what  is  not  known  to  have  been  pre- 
viously conferred,  must  be  conferred  on  them,  because  there  is  no 
heedlessness  of  presumption  where  there  is  the  diligence  of  piety."^ 


*  Epist.  cit.  c.  7.  n.  23. 
2  Apud.  Isidor.,  C.  Retulerunt  (86.),  ibid. 

»S.  Leo,  Epist.  167.  (alias  2.)  ad  Rustic.  Narbonens.,  inquisitio  16.  17;  C. 
Si  nulla  (113.),  ibid. 


114 


APPENDIX 


V.  Concerning  him  who  is  immersed  for  sport. 

We  are  often  asked  also  about  him  who,  like  an  actor,  is 
immersed  in  jest  but  in  commemoration  of  the  Trinity,  whether  he 
be  baptized. — This  also  Augustine^  does  not  make  plain,  when  he 
says:  "If  the  whole  thing  was  done  in  jest  and  mimicry  and  jocu- 
larity, I  think  the  divine  judgment  through  the  miracle  of  some 
revelation  should  be  implored  in  prayer,  as  to  whether  the  baptism, 
which  was  thus  given,  ought  to  be  approved."  It  seems  however  to 
wise  men  that  it  was  not  baptism ;  as  when  persons  are  immersed  in 
a  bath  or  in  a  river  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  the  act  is  still  not  a 
baptism,  because  it  was  not  done  with  the  intention  of  baptizing.  For 
in  this  and  in  other  sacraments  just  as  the  form  must  be  observed,  so 
also  there  must  be  the  intention  of  celebrating  it.  "Moreover  do  not 
let  this  disturb  you,  that  some  do  not  bring  their  children  to  baptism 
in  the  faith,  that  they  may  be  regenerated  by  the  Spirit  to  eternal 
life ;  but  think  that  through  this  remedy  they  receive  temporal  health ; 
for  not  on  that  account  do  the  children  fail  to  be  regenerated, 
because  they  were  not  offered  by  their  parents  with  this  intention."  ^ 

We  must  also  recognize  that  in  baptizing  the  elect  two  seasons^ 
are  to  be  adhered  to,  namely,  Easter  and  Pentecost,  so  that  the 
sacrament  of  baptism  may  be  celebrated  on  Easter  Saturday  or  that 
of  Pentecost.  But  any  who  are  in  the  emergency  of  death  or  danger 
ought  to  be  baptized  at  any  season. 

VI.  Of  the  replies  of  the  godparents. 

Furthermore  all  who  come  to  baptism  ought  to  profess  their 
faith  and  set  forth  for  what  purpose  they  come  to  the  Church. 
Wherefore  indeed  the  one  to  be  baptized  is  asked:  What  do  you 
come  to  the  Church  to  seek?  And  he,  if  he  is  come  to  maturity, 
responds  for  himself :  faith,  that  is,  the  sacrament  of  faith  and  teach- 
ing. So  then  being  asked  one  thing  at  a  time,  he  answers  that  he 
believes  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  holy  Spirit.  But 
if  he  is  an  infant,  not  able  to  believe  or  to  speak,  another  answers 

*  Lib.  VII.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  53.  n.  102 ;  C.  Solet  etiam 
quaeri  (31.),  ibid.    For  what  follows,  cf.  Hugh,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  VI.  c.  13. 

*  August.,  Epist.  98.  (alias  23.)  ad  .Bonifac.  n.  5;  C.  Non  illud  te  moveat 
(33.),  ibid. 

*  Cf.  Leo,  Epist.  16.  ad  universos  Episc.  per  Siciliam  constitutos  c.  5;  and 
C.  Duo  tempora  (12.),  ibid. 


k 


DISTINCTION  VI 


115 


I 


> 


for  him.  Wherefore  Isidore* :  "Infants  who  cannot  yet  speak  or 
believe  are  baptized  on  the  confession  of  another,  just  as  also  another 
confesses  for  the  sick,  the  dumb,  the  deaf,  while  they  are  being  bap- 
tized." So  also  we  must  do  for  penitents.  "But  if  another  responds 
for  one  who  can  respond,  it  is  not  efficacious  in  the  same  way,  as  has 
been  said :  *He  is  of  age,  let  him  speak  for  himself.' "  2 

But  if  we  are  asked  in  what  sense  it  is  said  for  the  child:  I 
beheve,  or  I  seek  faith;  we  say  that  the  sacrament  of  faith,  is  to 
be  understood,  that  he  is  said  to  seek  when  he  is  brought  to  the 
church,  and  he  is  said  to  have  faith  when  he  is  baptized ;  so  that  the 
sense  may  be  this :  I  seek  faith,  that  is,  I  am  ready  to  receive  the 
sacrament  of  faith;  I  believe,  that  is,  I  receive  the  sacrament  of 
faith;  or:  This  infant  is  ready  to  receive  the  sacrament  of 
faith.  Wherefore  Augustine^ :  "To  believe  is  nothing  else  than  to 
have  faith ;  and  therefore,  when  we  answer  that  the  infant  believes, 
who  has  not  yet  the  effect  of  faith,  we  answer  that  he  has 
through  the  sacrament  of  faith,  and  turns  to  God  through  the  sacra- 
ment of  conversion." 

But  we  are  still  asked  in  what  sense  we  answer  for  the  child: 
I  believe  in  God  the  Father,  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  the  holy 
Spirit.  Is  it  there  a  question  of  the  sacrament  of  faith  or  of  the 
faith  of  the  mind?  If  of  the  sacrament  why  are  the  persons  of  the 
Trinity  distinguished  by  name?  But  if  of  the  emotion  of  faith, 
how  is  it  true,  when  the  child  is  without  it  ?  Or  do  we  promise  that 
the  infant  will  believe  this  when  he  is  grown,  just  as  we  also  vow 
that  he  will  renounce  the  pomps  of  the  devil,  and  if  he  has  not 
observed  the  vow  when  he  comes  to  maturity,  will  he  or  the  sponsor 
be  held  to  account  ? — Rightly  indeed  we  can  say,  that  we  there  prom- 
ise for  the  infant,  that,  if  he  comes  to  maturer  years,  he  will  both 
renounce  the  pomps  of  the  devil  and  hold  a  sound  faith,  the  sacra- 
ment of  which  he  then  receives.  The  infant  will  be  held  moreover 
by  the  vow  made  for  him,  not  the  sponsor ;  provided  that  as  much 
as  in  him  lies  the  sponsor  has  taken  care  that  the  obligation  be  ful- 
filled, because  it  is  required  of  the  godfather  that  he  have  diligent 
solicitude  for  him  for  whom  he  promised.    Concerning  this  Augus- 

»  Lib.  II.  de  Ecclesiast.  officiis,  c.  25.  n.  7;  C.  Parvuli  (74.),  ibid. 
2  August.,  IV.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  24.  n.  31;  see  John  9,  21; 
C.  Cum  pro  parvulis  (77.),  ibid. 

» Epist.  98.  (aUas  23.)  ad  Bonifac.  episc.  n.  9;  C.  Nihil  est  aliud  (76.),  ibid. 


T      S      f 


ii6 


APPENDIX 


tine  says^ :  "You  have  undertaken  the  most  certain  obligation,  when 
you  solemnly  promised  to  renounce  the  pomps  of  the  devil." 

VII.     Of  catechism  and  exorcism. 

Moreover  these  questions  and  answers  concerning  faith  occur  in 
the  catechism^;  to  which  exorcism  is  added.  For  before  baptism 
catechism  and  exorcism  are  performed,  exorcism  following  after 
catechism,  so  that  the  power  of  the  adversary  may  be  expelled  from 
him  who  is  now  instructed  in  the  faith.  Exorcism,  a  Greek  word,  is 
translated  into  Latin,  adjuration;  catechism  is  translated  instruc- 
tion; to  catechize  is  to  instruct,  as  regards  the  Creed,  and  the  rudi- 
ments of  the  faith.  To  exorcize  is  to  adjure  as:  ''Depart  from  him, 
thou  unclean  spirit";  the  Creed  is  the  sign  or  collection:  a  sign, 
because  by  it  the  faithful  are  distinguished  from  infidels;  a  collec- 
tion, because  therein  the  completeness  and  entirety  of  the  faith  are 
collected. — Catechism  and  exorcism  are  for  neophytes,  and  ought  to 
be  called  sacramentals  rather  than  sacraments.  Neophyte  is  trans- 
lated novice  or  untried;  and  one  newly  converted  to  the  faith  or 
untried  in  the  discipline  of  'religious  conversation'  is  called  a  neo- 
phyte.— Catechism  and  exorcism  therefore  precede  baptism,  not 
because  without  them  there  cannot  be  true  baptism,  but  in  order  that 
the  one  to  be  baptized  may  be  instructed  concerning  the  faith,  and 
may  know  to  whom  he  is  thenceforth  become  a  debtor,  and  that  the 
power  of  the  devil  may  be  diminished  in  him.  Wherefore  Ra- 
banus^ :  "For  an  adult  the  office  of  catechizing  ought  to  come  before 
baptism ;  so  that  a  catechumen  may  receive  the  rudiments  of  faith, 
and  may  know  to  whom  he  is  thenceforth  become  a  debtor."  Also 
Augustine*:  ''Infants  are  blown  upon  and  exorcised,  so  that  the 
power  of  the  devil  may  be  banished  from  them,"  "lest-"'  now  he  try 
to  destroy  them,  that  they  attain  not  to  baptism."  "Therefore^  it 
is  not  a  creature  of  God  that  is  blown  out  and  exorcized  from  infants, 
but  the  devil,  that  he  may  depart  from  man." 

*  According  to  the  sense,  from  i.  Serm.  ad  Neophytos  (among  the  works  of 
Augustine);  according  to  the  words,  C.  Prima  igitur  (73.),  ibid. 

2  The  passage  following  is  from  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  VI. 
c.  8.  9.  10. 

'  Lib.  I.  de  Institutione  clericorum,  c.  25.  C.  Ante  baptismum  (54.),  ibid. 

*  De  Symbolo  ad  catechum.  serm.  i.e.  i.  n.  2;  C.  Sicui  nostis  (62.),  ibid. 

•  Raban.,  ibid.  c.  27. 

•  August.,  de  Symbobo,  loc.  cit. 


V 


Distinction  VII 

I.  Of  the  Sacrament  of  Confirmation. 

Now  we  must  next  discuss  the  sacrament  of  confirmation,  for 
we  are  often  questioned  concerning  its  virtue.  For  the  form  is  clear, 
that  is,  the  words  which  the  bishop  says,  when  he  signs  the  baptized 
on  the  forehead  with  the  sacred  chrism. 

II.  That  it  can  only  be  performed  by  the  chief  priests. 

This  sacrament^  cannot  be  performed  by  any  except  the  chief 
priests,  for  we  read  that  in  the  time  of  the  apostles  it  was  not  per- 
formed by  others  than  the  apostles  themselves,  nor  can,  nor  ought  it 
be  performed  by  others  than  those  who  hold  the  place  of  the  apostles. 
For  if  it  be  undertaken  by  others,  it  is  held  to  be  null  and  void,  nor 
will  it  be  counted  among  the  sacraments  of  the  church.  But  it  is 
lawful  for  presbyters  to  touch  the  baptized  on  the  breast  but  not 
to  sign  them  with  the  chrism  on  the  forehead. 

III.  What  the  virtue  of  this  sacrament  is. 

The  virtue  moreover  of  the  sacrament  is  the  gift  of  the  holy 
Spirit  for  strength,  who  is  given  in  baptism  for  remission.  Where- 
fore Rabanus^:  "By  the  chief  priest  through  the  laying  on  of  hands 
the  Paraclete  is  given  to  one  baptized,  that  he  may  be  strengthened 
through  the  holy  Spirit,  to  proclaim  to  others  that  which  he  has 
attained  in  baptism."  Also^:  "All  the  faithful  ought  after  bap- 
tism to  receive  the  holy  Spirit  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  by  the  bishops 
so  that  they  may  be  found  to  be  complete  Christians." 

IV.  Whether  this  sacrament  is  more  worthy  than  baptism. 

"Know  that  both  are  great  sacraments,  but  one  must  be  held  in 
greater  veneration,  as  it  is  administered  by  those  who  are  greater."  * 
— See  he  calls  the  sacrament  of  confirmation  the  greater;  but  perhaps 

*  Passage  taken  from  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  i;  and  C.  Manus  quoque  (4.),  de 
Consecrat.  dist.  5. 

2  Lib.  I.  de  Institutione  clericorum,  c.  30. 

'  Can.  Omnes  fideles  (i.)  de  Consecrat.  dist.  5. 

*  Can.  De  his  vero  (3.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  5. 

117 


t      1      V 


ii8 


APPENDIX 


not  on  account  of  the  greater  virtue  and  utility  which  it  confers,  but 
because  it  is  administered  by  those  who  are  worthier,  and  is  per- 
formed on  a  worthier  part  of  the  body,  that  is  on  the  forehead ;  or 
perhaps  because  it  offers  a  greater  increase  of  virtue,  although 
baptism  has  more  power  for  remission.  Rabanus  seems  to  mean  this 
when  he  says  that^  "in  the  anointing  of  baptism  the  holy  Spirit 
descends  to  consecrate  his  habitation  to  God.  But  in  this  sacrament 
his  seven-fold  grace,  with  all  fullness  of  sanctity  and  virtue  comes 
upon  man." — This  sacrament  ought  only  to  be  received  by  persons 
fasting,  and  be  administered  by  fasting,  just  as  baptism,  unless 
necessity  compels  otherwise.^ 

V.     Whether  it  can  he  repeated. 

Nor  ought  it  be  repeated,  as  baptism  ought  not,  nor  ordination. 
For  injury  must  not  be  done  to  any  sacrament;  and  it  would  be 
thought  an  injury,  were  we  to  repeat  what  must  not  be  repeated. — 
But  whether  some  can  be  repeated  or  none  is  a  question.  For  that 
baptism  and  ordination  ought  not  be  repeated,  Augustine  clearly 
says^ :  "Each  is  a  sacrament,  and  is  administered  with  a  certain  con- 
secration, the  one  when  a  person  is  baptized ;  but  the  other  when  he 
is  ordained.  Therefore  in  the  Catholic  Church  it  is  not  permitted 
to  repeat  either,"  because  injury  must  not  be  done  to  either.  And 
without  doubt  we  must  hold  that  this  is  true  also  of  confirmation ; 
but  whether  others  can  or  ought  to  be  repeated,  we  shall  discuss  later. 

Note.  Gregory*  writes  to  Bishop  Januarius  thus :  "It  has  come 
to  our  ears,  that  some  have  been  offended,  because  we  restrained 
presbyters  from  touching  with  the  chrism  those  who  had  been  bap- 
tized; and  we  certainly  did  this  according  to  the  old  use  of  our 
church.  But  if  some  are  much  distressed  by  this ;  we  concede  that 
where  bishops  are  absent,  presbyters  may  touch  the  baptized  with 
chrism  even  on  the  forehead."  "But  that  concession  seems  to  me 
to  have  been  made  at  one  particular  time  for  checking  a  scandal." 

*  Loc.  cit.,  and  C.  Novissime  (5.),  ibid. 

*  Cf.  C.  Ut  ieiuni  (6.)  and  Ut  episcopi  (7.),  ibid.;  and  Hugh,  II.  de  Sacram. 
p.  VII.  c.  5. 

'  Lib.  II.  contra  Epist.  Parmeniani,  c.  13.  n.  28,  and  C.  Quod  quidam  (97.), 
c.  I.  q.  I.  |i. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Regist.  indict.  12.  epist.  26,  and  C.  Pervenit  (i.),  dist.  95.     The 
following  passage  gives  the  words  of  Gratian  on  C.  PreshyUros  (2.),  ibid. 


)^ 


( 


Distinction  VIII 


PART   I 


I.  Of  the  sacrament  of  the  altar. 

"After  the  sacrament  of  baptism  and  of  confirmation,  follows 
the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist.  Through  baptism  we  are  cleansed, 
through  the  Eucharist,  we  are  perfected  in  what  is  good."  ^  Baptism 
extinguishes  the  fire  of  sins,  the  Eucharist  restores  us  spiritually. 
Wherefore  it  is  well  called  the  Eucharist,  that  is,  good  grace,  because 
in  this  sacrament  not  only  is  there  increase  of  virtue  and  grace,  but 
he  who  is  the  fount  and  source  of  all  grace  is  received  entire. 

II.  That  in  the  Old  Testament  there  was  a  type  of  this  sacrament, 

just  as  of  baptism. 

"There  was  a  previous  type  of  it,  when  God  rained  manna  on 
the  Fathers  in  the  wilderness,  and  fed  them  with  heavenly  food; 
wherefore:  *Man  has  eaten  the  bread  of  angels.'  But  those  who 
ate  that  bread  then  died.  But  this  is  the  living  bread,  which  *came 
down  from  heaven,'  and  gave  life  to  the  world."^  That  manna  was 
from  heaven,  this  above  heaven ;  that  when  reserved  to  another  day 
was  full  of  worms;  this  is  free  from  all  corruption;  whoever  has 
tasted  it  religiously  shall  not  see  corruption.  That  was  given  to 
the  ancients  after  the  crossing  of  the  Red  Sea,  where  the  Hebrews 
were  freed  by  the  drowning  of  the  Egyptians^;  so  this  heavenly 
manna  ought  only  be  given  to  those  re-born.  That  bread  for  the 
body  led  the  ancient  people  through  the  desert  to  the  land  of  promise ; 
this  heavenly  food  sustains  the  faithful  going  through  the  desert  of 
this  world  to  heaven.  Wherefore  it  is  rightly  called  the  'viaticum,' 
because  it  restores  us  on  the  way,  and  leads  us  unto  the  fatherland. 
Therefore  just  as  in  the  Red  Sea  we  find  baptism  typified,  so  in  the 


*  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  2. 

*  Ambrose,  de  Mysteriis,  c.  8.  n.  47;  n.  48  for  the  following  passage;  both 
in  C.  Revera  (69.)  de  Consecrat.  dist.  2.    See  Exod.  16,  15;  Ps.  77,  25;  John  6,  41. 

*£xod.  16,  14;  then  14,  25  ff. 

119 


I20 


APPENDIX 


I 


'4 


manna  is  the  Lord's  body  signified.  These  two  sacraments  were 
indicated  when  the  blood  and  water  flowed  from  the  side  of  Christ*  • 
because  Christ  came  to  redeem  us  from  the  devil  and  sin  by  the  blood 
of  redemption,  and  the  water  of  cleansing,  just  as  he  freed  the  Israel- 
ites from  the  destroyer  by  the  blood  of  the  paschal  lamb,"  and  from 
the  Egyptians  by  the  water  of  the  sea.— Melchisedech  also  prefigured 
the  rite  of  this  sacrament,  when  he  oflFered  bread  and  wine  to  Abra- 
ham.* Wherefore,  as  Ambrose*  says,  it  is  clear,  "that  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  Christians  came  before  those  of  the  Jews." 

III.     Of  the  institution  of  this  sacrament. 

Here  four  other  things  present  themselves  for  consideration 
^at  IS,  the  institution,  the  form,  the  sacrament,  and  the  thing  (res) 
The  Lord  instituted  the  sacrament,  when  after  the  type  of  the  lamb 
he  offered  his  body  and  blood  to  the  disciples  at  supper.  Where- 
fore Eusebius  Emisenus»:  "Because  he  was  about  to  withdraw  from 
their  eyes  the  body  he  had  assumed,  and  bear  it  to  the  heavens  it 
was  necessary  that  on  the  day  of  the  Feast  he  should  consecrate  the 
sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood  for  us,  so  that  what  was  once 
offered  as  a  ransom,  might  be  perpetually  worshipped  through  a 
mystery."  ^ 

P.^RT  II 

IV.     Of  the  form. 

.™^.^"*  the  form  is  that  which  he  himself  taught  when  he  said: 
Ihis  IS  my  body";  and  afterward:  "This  is  my  blood."  For  when 
these  words  are  uttered,  a  change  of  the  blood  and  wine  into  the 
substance  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  takes  place.  All  other 
words  are  said  to  the  praise  of  God.  Wherefore  Ambrose*  •  "This 
sacrament  is  accomplished  by  the  words  of  Christ,  because  the  words 
of  Christ  change  the  creature;  and  thus  the  bread  becomes  the  body 

'  John  19,  34. 

•Exod.  12,  13. 

•Gen.  14,  18. 

*  Loc.  cit.  c.  8.  n.  44;  and  IV.  de  Sacram.  c.  3.  n.  10. 

'  ^°'^'^-  <1«  Corp.  et  sang.  Christi.  n.  i.  among  the  works  of  Jerome  (Episl 

corpus  (35.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  2. 


X 


^ 


DISTINCTION  VIII 


121 


yI 


f 
\ 


>- 


il 


li 


i 


of  Christ,  and  the  wine  with  water  poured  into  the  chalice  becomes 
the  blood  by  the  consecration  of  the  heavenly  word.  By  what  words 
is  the  consecration  made?  Hear  what  the  words  are:  'Take  ye  and 
eat  ye  all  of  this;  this  is  my  body,'  and  again:  Take  ye  and  drink 
ye  all  of  this,  this  is  my  blood.'  All  the  rest  that  is  uttered  renders 
praise  to  God,  offers  prayer  for  the  people  and  for  the  kings."  Also, 
Augustine^  :  *'We  must  believe  that  in  these  words  of  Christ  the 
sacraments  are  accomplished ;  all  the  rest  are  merely  praises,  or  the 
earnest  supplications  and  petitions  of  the  faithful."— See  now  what 
is  the  institution  and  form  of  this  sacrament. 

V.     Why  Christ  gave  this  sacrament  to  his  disciples  after  other  food. 

Here  it  is  worthy  of  consideration  why  he  gave  this  sacrament 
to  the  disciples  after  supper.  The  Lord  Jesus  being  about  to  depart 
to  the  invisible  majesty  of  his  Father's  glory,  and  having  celebrated 
the  symbolical  passover  with  the  disciples,  wished  to  commend  to 
them  some  memorial,  and  gave  them  his  body  and  blood  under  the 
figure  of  bread  and  wine,  in  order  to  show  that  the  sacraments  of  the 
old  law,  among  which  the  sacrifice  of  the  paschal  lamb  was  chief, 
were  terminated  at  his  death,  and  the  sacraments  of  the  new  law 
substituted,  and  among  these  the  mystery  of  the  Eucharist  is  pre- 
eminent. Therefore  he  ordained  the  Eucharist  after  the  other  sacra- 
ments that  this  sacrament  might  be  more  deeply  impressed  on  the 
memory  of  the  disciples,  and  thenceforth  be  repeated  frequently  by 
the  Church.  But  he  did  not  on  that  account  appoint  it  for  discipline 
in  the  future,  that  it  should  be  received  after  other  food,  but  rather 
it  ought  to  be  received  fasting,  as  the  Apostle  teaches,2  so  that  it  may 
be  marked  by  exceptional  reverence,  that  is,  set  apart  from  other 
food ;  and  this  the  Lord  left  to  the  Apostles  to  arrange.  Wherefore 
Augustine*^ :  "It  appears,  that  when  the  disciples  first  received  the 
Eucharist,  they  did  not  receive  it  fasting.  But  we  should  not  there- 
fore scorn  the  universal  Church,  because  its  members  always  re- 
ceived the  Eucharist  fasting.     For  it  pleased  the  holy  Spirit,  that 

'  Found  briefly  in  Paschasius  Radbertus,  de  Corp.  et  sang.  Domini   c    15 
n.  I,  and  C.  Utrum  sub  figura  (72.),  ibid.  §2.  3.    For  the  following  cf.  Glossa  ad 
1.  Cor.  II,  23.  24.  in  Lyranus. 

'I.  Cor.  II,  22  and  34. 

'  Epist.  54  (alias  118.)  ad  lanuar.  c.  6.  n.  7.  8,  and  C.  Liquido  (54.),  ibid. 


( 


"^^-- 


•'-^' ---^- "*""" ■ 


122 


APPENDIX 


in  honor  of  so  great  a  sacrament,  the  body  of  the  Lord  should  enter 
into  the  mouth  of  a  Christian  before  other  food ;  therefore  this  cus- 
tom is  observed  everywhere.  For  not  because  the  Lord  gave  the 
Eucharist  after  other  food,  ought  we  to  receive  it  after  breakfast 
or  dinner,  as  did  those  whom  the  Apostle  reproved.  For  the  Saviour 
that  he  might  the  more  strongly  commend  the  loftiness  of  this  mys- 
tery, wished  to  impress  it  last  on  the  hearts  and  memory  of  his  dis- 
ciples, from  whom  he  was  about  to  go  to  his  passion.  But  in  what 
order  it  was  thereafter  to  be  received  he  left  to  be  taught  by  the 
apostles,  through  whom  he  would  organize  his  churches." 

VL     Of  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  (res). 

Now  let  us  see  what  is  the  sacrament  and  what  the  thing  (res). 
"The  sacrament  is  the  visible  form  of  invisible  grace"  ^ ;  the  form 
therefore  of  the  bread  and  wine  which  appears  here  is  the  sacrament, 
that  is,  **the  sign  of  a  sacred  thing,  because  it  calls  something  to 
mind  beyond  the  appearance  which  it  presents  to  the  senses."  There- 
fore the  appearances  "keep  the  names  of  the  things  which  they  were 
before,  namely,  bread  and  wine." 

VIL     That  the  thing  (res)  of  this  sacrament  is  two-fold. 

"Moreover  the  thing  (res)  of  this  sacrament  is  two-fold:  one, 
what  is  contained  and  signified,  the  other  what  is  signified  but  not 
contained.  The  thing  contained  and  signified  is  the  flesh  of  Christ 
which  he  received  from  the  Virgin,  and  the  blood  which  he  shed  for 
us.  The  thing  signified  and  not  contained  is  the  unity  of  the  Church 
in  those  who  are  predestined,  called,  justified  and  glorified."  2  This 
is  the  two-fold  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ.  Wherefore  Jerome:  "In 
two  ways,"  he  says,  "are  the  flesh  of  Christ  and  his  blood  under- 
stood :  either  the  flesh  which  was  crucified  and  buried,  and  the  blood 
which  was  shed  by  the  lance  of  the  soldier;  or  that  spiritual  and 
divine  body  of  which  he  himself  says^ :  'My  flesh  is  food  indeed,  and 
my  blood  is  drink  indeed' ;  and :  'Unless  ye  eat  my  flesh  and  drink 

1  August.,  X.  de  Civ.  Dei  c.  5,  and  Epist.  105  (alias  166.)  ad  Donatistas, 
c.  3.  n.  12;  cf.  C.  Sacrificium  (32.  §1.),  ibid.— Following  passage  is  II.  de  Doctr. 
Christiana,  c.  i.  n.  i,  and  C.  Signum  (33.),  ibid.    Third  is  in  C.  Specie  (34.),  ibid. 

«  Glossa  ad  I.  Cor.  11,  23.  in  Lyranus,  where  are  also  the  words  of  Jerome, 
Comment,  in  Eph.  i,  7;  (cf.  C.  Dupliciter  (49.),  ibid.)  and  the  third  passage. 

»  John  6,  56. 


A 


DISTINCTION  VIII  123 

my  blood,  ye  have  not  life  in  you.'  "  1    Therefore  three  things  are  to 
be  distmguished  here:  the  first  which  is  the  sacrament  only;  the 
second  which  is  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  (res) ;  and  the  third 
which  is  the  thing  and  not  the  sacrament.     The  sacrament  and  not 
the  thmg  IS  the  visible  form  of  bread  and  wine ;  the  sacrament  and 
the  thmg  IS  the  very  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ;  the  thing  and  not  the 
sacrament,  is  his  mystical  flesh.— Furthermore  that  visible  form  is 
the  sacrament  of  something  two-fold ;  because  it  signifies  two  things 
and  bears  the  express  likeness  of  two  things.    For  just  as  bread  more 
than  other  foods  restores  and  sustains  the  body  and  wine  gladdens 
and  mebriates  man,  so  the  flesh  of  Christ  spiritually  restores  and 
sustams  the  mward  man  more  than  other  graces;  wherefore:  ^My 
chahce  which  mebriateth  me,  how  goodly  is  it !'  2    The  visible  form 
?r'?  ^ur  f /f  ^"^bl^"^^  ^o  ^  "mystical  thing,  which  is  the  unity  of 
the  faithful,3  because  just  as  one  loaf  is  made  from  many  grains 
and  wme  from  many  grapes  flows  together,  so  ecclesiastical  unity  is 
composed  of  the  many  persons  of  the  faithful."     Wherefore  the 
Apostle^ :  "We  being  many  are  one  bread  and  one  body."  Wherefore 
Augustme^ :  'The  Church  is  called  one  bread  and  one  body,  because 
just  as  one  loaf  is  composed  of  many  grains,  and  one  body  of  manv 
members  so  the  Church  of  many  faithful  is  bound  together  by  unit- 
mg  charity.         This  mystery  of  our  peace  and  unity  Christ  conse- 
crated  at  his  table     He  who  receives  this  mystery  of  unity  and  does 
not  keep  the  bond  of  peace,  receives  this  mystery  not  for  himself 
but  against  himself."     ''And  of  this  unity  also  Christ's  own  body' 
received  from  the  Virgin  is  the  sacrament;  because  as  the  body  of 
Christ  was  composed  of  many  very  pure  and  immaculate  members, 

f rom  th^.^^^^^^  1      '  ?""'  "  ^'"P^^^^  ''  "-y  P-^ons  freed 

was  m^L  T  ^     "    ^;  '  l^  "'  '''''  ""^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  -^  the  Lord 
was  made  of  setim-wood,  which  does  not  decay,  but  is  like  white 


» John  6,  54. 
*  Psalm  22,  5. 

» Cf.  August.,  in  loan.  Evang.  tr.  26.  n.  15  and  17. 
I.  Cor.  10,  17.    Cf.  ibid.  Lyranus. 

«  Exod.  25,  10.  '    ^' 


'A 


Distinction  IX 

I.     Of  the  two  zi'ays  of  eating. 

And  just  as  there  are  two  things  in  this  sacrament,  so  also  "there 
are  two  ways  of  eating :  one  sacramental,  in  which  the  good  and  evil 
eat ;  the  other  spiritual,  in  which  only  the  good  eat/'  i     Wherefore 
Augustine:  "What  is  it  to  eat  Christ?    It  is  not  only  to  receive  his 
body  in  the  sacrament— for  many  receive  it  unworthily— but  to  abide 
in  him  and  to  have  him  abiding  in  oneself."    "For  he  eats  spiritually, 
who  abides  in  the  unity  of  Christ  and  of  the  Church,  which  the 
sacrament  signifies."    For  he  who  is  at  variance  with  Christ,  neither 
eats  the  flesh  of  Christ,  nor  drinks  his  blood,  but  receives  the  sacra- 
ment of  it  daily  to  his  own  judgment."     Augustine2  distinguishing 
spiritual  eating  from  the  sacramental,  says:  "Why  do  you  prepare 
your  stomach  and  teeth  ?    Believe  and  you  have  eaten.    For  to  beheve 
on  him  is  to  eat  the  bread  and  wine ;  whoever  believes  on  him  eats 
of  him."    The  same:  "How  is  Christ  eaten?     In  the  way  that  he 
says^ :  'Whoso  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood,  abideth  in  me, 
and  I  in  him.'    If  he  abides  in  me,  and  I  in  him,  then  he  drinks; 
but  whoever  does  not  abide  in  me,  nor  I  in  him,  even  if  he  receives 
the  sacrament,  lays  up  for  himself  great  torment."     The  same*: 
"No  one  need  doubt  that  he  is  made  a  partaker  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord  at  the  time  when  he  is  made  a  member  of  Christ; 
nor  is  he  separated   from  the   fellowship  of  this  bread  and  cup, 
even  though  before  he  eats  this  bread  and  drinks  this  cup,  he  passes 
from  this  world  established  in  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ, 
because  he  is  not  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  this  sacrament,  since 


»Glossa  on  I.  Cor.  ii,  29,  in  Lyranus;  where  are  also  the  two  passages  of 
Augustine,  first,  Serm.  71  (alias  11.  de  Verbis  Dom.)  c.  11.  n.  17;  C.  Quid  est 
Christum  (46.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  2;  and  the  other  Lib.  Sentent.  Prosperi  (among 
the  works  of  Augustine)  n.  341;  C.  Qui  discordat  (65.).  ibid. 

« In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  25.  n.  12;  C.  Ut  quid  paras  (47.),  ibid.;  following  pas- 
sage ibid.  tr.  26.  n.  i,  and  in  the  same  Canon  (Augustine:  panem  vivum  for  panem 
et  vinum). 

« John  6,  57. 

*  Ibid.  n.  18;  C.  46.  supra  cit.    Also  in  Bede,  in  I.  Cor.  11,  27. 

"4 


DISTINCTION  IX 


125 


U 


> 


ir 


he  evidently  possesses  that  which  this  sacrament  signifies."  For 
in  this  sacrament  Christ  has  commended  his  body  and  blood  to 
us,  which  he  has  also  made  us  to  be.  For  we  are  made  his  very 
body.  Again*  :  "Whoever  is  at  variance  with  Christ  does  not  eat 
his  flesh,  nor  drink  his  blood,  even  if  he  receive  the  sacrament 
of  that  great  marvel  to  his  own  judgment." 

II.     Of  the  error  of  those  who  say  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  received 
only  by  the  good. 

Some  persons,  with  dull  understandings,  reading  these  words 
and  others  like  them,  where  spiritual  eating  is  discussed,  have  been 
so  involved  in  the  darkness  of  error  that  they  presume  to  say  that 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  received  by  the  good  only  and  not 
by  the  bad. — But  without  doubt  we  must  believe  that  they  are 
received  by  the  good,  not  only  sacramentally,  but  also  spiritually ;  but 
by  the  wicked  only  sacramentally,  namely  as  a  sacrament;  that  is, 
under  the  visible  form  are  received  the  flesh  of  Christ  derived  from 
the  Virgin  and  the  blood  shed  for  us,  but  not  the  mystical  flesh  and 
blood,  which  are  only  for  the  good.  This  is  proved  by  the  following 
testimonies.  Gregory- :  "There  is  indeed  the  true  flesh  of  Christ  and 
the  true  blood  in  sinners  and  those  who  receive  unworthily,  but  in 
essence,  not  in  saving  efficacy."  Also  Augustine^ :  "Many  un- 
worthily receive  the  body  of  the  Lord ;  concerning  whom  the  Apostle 
says* :  *  Whoever  eateth  and  drinketh  the  cup  of  the  Lord  unworthily, 
eateth  and  drinketh  judgment  to  himself.'  By  which  we  are  taught 
to  guard  against  receiving  the  good  wickedly.  For  see,  evil  is  done 
when  the  good  is  received  wickedly;  just  as,  on  the  contrary,  good 
was  done  by  the  Apostle,  when  he  received  evil  well,  as  when  he  bore 
the  goad  of  Satan  patiently.  Therefore  even  evils  benefit  the  good, 
just  as  the  angel  of  Satan  did  Paul,  and  sacred  things  harm  the  evil : 
they  are  unto  salvation  for  the  good,  and  unto  judgment  for  the  evil. 
Wherefore  he  who  eats  and  drinks  unworthily,  eats  and  drinks 
judgment  to  himself,  not  because  the  thing  itself  is  evil,  but  because 


*  August.,  in  Sent.  Prosperi^  see  note  above,  p.  i. 

2  Passage  not  in  Gregory,  but  in  Lanfranc,  de  Corpore  et  sang.  Dom.  c.  20. 

*  From  tr.  6.  in  loan.  Evang.  n.  15  and  tr.  62.  n.  i ;  C.  Et  sancta  (66.),  ibid. 

*  I.  Cor.  1 1 ,  29. 


126 


APPENDIX 


the  wicked  man  wickedly  receives  that  which  is  good."  The  same* : 
"Whoever  unworthily  receives  the  body  of  Christ  does  not  bring  it 
to  pass  that  because  he  is  evil,  what  he  receives  is  evil,  or  because  he 
does  not  receive  it  unto  salvation,  he  receives  nothing.  For  the  body 
and  blood  of  the  Lord  were  none  the  less  in  those  to  whom  the 
Apostle  says2:  'Whoever  eateth  unworthily,'  etc."— By  these  and 
many  other  authorities  it  is  clearly  shown  that  even  by  the  wicked 
the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  received ;  but  sacramentally, 
not  spiritually. 

III.     On  the  meaning  of  certain  ambiguous  words. 

Regarding  these  two  ways  of  receiving,  the  meaning  of  certain 
ambiguous  words  must  be  explained.  For  Augustine^  says :  "A  good 
man  receives  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  of  the  sacrament  (rem 
sacrament! );  but  a  wicked  man  the  sacrament  and  not  the  thing 
(rem)."  By  sacrament  he  means  the  actual  body  of  Christ,  born  of 
the  Virgin ;  but  by  the  thing  he  means  the  spiritual  flesh  of  Christ. 
The  good  man  therefore  receives  the  flesh  of  Christ  in  both  senses, 
but  the  wicked  only  the  sacrament,  that  is,  the  body  of  Christ  under 
the  sacrament,  and  not  the  spiritual  thing.— In  like  manner^ :  "He 
that  eats  not,  eats,  and  he  that  eats,  eats  not,  because  he  that  does 
not  eat  sacramentally,  sometimes  eats  spiritually,"  and  conversely. 
And  those  who  eat  spiritually  are  said  to  receive  the  truth  of  the  flesh 
and  blood,  "because  they  have  its  actual  effect,  that  is,  remission  of 
sins,"  ^  for  which  we  apparently  pray  when  we  say:  "We  pray,  O 
Lord,  that  thy  sacraments  may  accomplish  in  us  that  which  they 
contain ;  so  that  what  we  now  have  in  appearance,  we  may  receive  in 
their  inmost  truth."  By  "their  inmost  truth"  he  means  their  eflFect, 
as  if  he  said:  "Grant  through  these  sacraments,  as  we  receive  sacra- 


ibid. 


»Lib.  V.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  8.  n.  9;  C.  Sicut  ludas  (68.), 


*I.  Cor.  II,  29. 

»  Gathered  from  the  passages  cited.  Literally  in  Glossa  ad  I.  Cor.  11,  24  in 
Lyranus. 

*  In  Glossa  cit. 

^  Lanfranc,  as  above,  and  C.  Species  et  similitudo  (34.),  ibid.  The  following 
prayer  is  in  Gregory,  Lib.  Sacrament,  n.  487;  cf.  Guitmund,  IL  de  Corporis  et 
sang.  Dom.  veritate. 


DISTINCTION  IX 


127 


mentally  the  flesh  of  Christ,  so  may  we  receive  it  spiritually."  Or  the 
priest  prays  that  Christ  who  now  is  truly  received  under  the  form 
of  bread  and  wine,  may  some  time  be  received  in  clear  vision,  just 
as  he  is  in  the  essence  of  his  divinity. — It  is  therefore  certain  that 
the  body  of  Christ  is  received  by  the  good  and  by  the  wicked ;  but 
by  the  good  unto  salvation,  by  the  wicked  unto  destruction. 


I     ^ 


I 


Distinction  X 


PART   I 


I.     Of  the  heresy  of  others  who  say  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  not 
on  the  altar  save  in  sign. 

There  are  also  others  who  exceed  the  madness  of  the  above 
described,  who,  measuring  the  virtue  of  God  by  the  measure  of 
natural  things,  deny  the  truth  more  audaciously  and  dangerously, 
asserting  that  on  the  altar  there  is  neither  the  body  of  Christ  nor  the 
blood,  nor  is  the  substance  of  bread  or  of  wine  converted  into  the 
substance  of  flesh  and  blood  but  that  Christ  said^  :  'This  is  my  body," 
just  as  the  Apostle  said^:  ''And  the  rock  was  Christ."  For  they  say 
that  the  body  of  Christ  is  there  only  in  the  sacrament,  that  is,  in  sym- 
bol, and  merely  in  symbol  is  it  eaten  by  us.  These  find  the  occasion 
of  their  error  in  the  words  of  the  Truth,  from  which^  the  first  heresy 
arose  among  the  disciples  of  Christ.  For  when  he  said:  "Except  a 
man  eat  my  flesh,  and  drink  my  blood,  he  shall  not  have  eternal  life" ; 
they  not  understanding  said :  "This  saying  is  hard,  who  can  under- 
stand it?  and  they  went  back."  When  they  had  departed,  he  taught 
the  twelve  who  remained:  "It  is  the  Spirit,"  he  said,  "who  giveth 
life ;  Ihe  flesh  profiteth  nothing.  The  words  which  I  have  spoken  to 
you,  are  spirit  and  life."  Have  you  understood  them  spiritually? 
They  are  spirit  and  life.  Have  you  understood  them  carnally? 
Even  so  they  are  spirit  and  life,  but  they  are  not  so  for  you.  Under- 
stand spiritually  that  which  I  have  said.  It  is  not  this  body  which 
you  see  that  you  shall  eat,  nor  drink  this  blood  which  they  who 
crucify  me  shall  shed.  I  have  commended  a  certain  sacrament  to 
you,  which  if  it  be  spiritually  understood,  will  give  you  life;  but  the 
flesh  profiteth  nothing." — There  are  also  other  passages  which  add 


» Matt.  26,  26. 

*  I.  Cor.  10,  4. 

»  What  follows  is  taken  from  C.  Prima  quidetn  (44.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  2; 
gathered  from  Augustine,  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  54.  n.  23,  and  in  Ps.  98.  n.  9;  also  ver- 
botenus  in  Alger,  I.  de  Sacram.  corp.  et  sang.  Dom.  c.  11.  See  John  6,  54.  61. 
67.  64. 

128 


> 


DISTINCTION  X 


129 


.  / 


> 


I    • 


fuel  to  the  madness  of  these  people.  For  Augustine  says^ :  "Until 
this  age  shall  be  ended,  the  Lord  is  on  high ;  but  nevertheless  there  is 
here  also  with  us  the  Truth,  the  Lord.  For  the  body  in  which  he 
rose  again  must  be  in  one  place;  but  his  truth  is  diflfused  every- 
where." Also^ :  One  person  is  God  and  man,  inasmuch  as  Christ  is 
God,  he  is  everywhere,  inasmuch  as  he  is  man  he  is  in  heaven." 
Christ  also  says :  "The  poor  ye  have  always  with  you,  but  me  ye  have 
not  always."  The  aforesaid  heretics  use  these  and  other  sayings  to 
maintain  their  error. — All  these  passages  are  to  be  interpreted  in  the 
same  manner.  For  these  words  do  not  deny  that  the  true  body  of 
Christ  is  received  by  the  faithful  or  that  it  is  on  the  altar,  but  by 
these  words  the  Truth  instructed  the  Apostles  and  through  them 
us,  that  he  was  giving  us  his  body,  not  divided  into  parts,  as  those 
disciples  thought,  who  went  back,  but  entire;  and  not  visibly,  in 
human  form,  but  invisibly  under  the  form  of  bread  and  wine,  did  he 
give  us  his  body  and  blood.  Augustine^  confirms  this  meaning  when 
he  says:  "It  is  his  body  itself,  and  not  his  body  which  was  seen,  that 
is  eaten;  his  body  indeed,  invisibly;  not  his  body  visibly."    Also'*: 

* 

"And  if  it  is  necessary  that  it  should  be  celebrated  visibly,  it  is 
necessary  that  it  be  understood  invisibly."  So  also  the  body  of  Christ 
must  be  understood  to  be  in  one  place,  that  is,  visibly  in  human  form ; 
but  his  Truth,  that  is,  his  Divinity,  is  everywhere;  his  truth  also, 
that  is,  his  true  body  is  on  every  altar,  wherever  it  is  celebrated.  So 
also  is  this  to  be  understood:  "The  poor  ye  have  always  with  you, 
but  me  ye  have  not  always,"  that  is,  with  reference  to  his  corporal 
presence,  in  which  he  was  conversing  with  them.  Similarly,  inas- 
much as  he  is  man,  he  is  in  heaven,  that  is,  visibly ;  but  he  is  on  the 
altar  invisibly,  because  he  does  not  appear  in  human  form,  but  is 
hidden  under  the  form  of  bread  and  wine.  Wherefore  also  his  flesh, 
which  is  truly  on  the  altar,  is  said  to  be  invisible ;  but  because  it  does 
not  appear  in  its  own  form,  it  is  said  to  be  invisible.  For  Augustine 
says'^ :  "This  is  what  we  say,  what  we  strive  in  every  way  to  prove : 


*  In  loan.  Evang.  tr.  30.  n.  i;  cf.  also  tr.  50.  n.  12.  f.  and  canon  cited  §1. 

*  August.,  Epist.  187.  (alias  57.)  ad  DardaA.  c.  3.  n.  10.    See  Matt.  26,  ii'; 
Mark  14,  7. 

^  So  C.  Non  hoc  corpus  (45.),  ibid.;  and  Alger,  loc.  cit.  c.  9. 

*  August.  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  98.  n.  9,  and  Can.  cit. 

^  Not  found  in  Augustine,  but  in  Lanfranc,  de  Corp.  et  sang.  Dom.  c.  10^ 
In  C.  Hoc  est  quod  dicimus  (48.),  ibid. 


I30 


APPENDIX 


that  the  sacrifice  of  the  Church  is  consummated  by  two  things  and 
consists  of  two  things ;  the  visible  form  of  the  elements,  and  the  invis- 
ible flesh  and  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  the  sacrament  and 
in  that  which  the  sacrament  symbolizes,  that  is,  the  body  of  Christ ; 
just  as  the  person  of  Christ  consists  and  is  composed  of  God  and 
man,  since  Christ  is  very  God  and  man,  because  everything  contains 
in  itself  the  nature  and  truth  of  those  things,  of  which  it  consists. 
Now  the  sacrifice  of  the  Church  consists  of  two  parts :  the  sacrament, 
and  the  thing  of  the  sacrament,  that  is,  the  body  of  Christ.  There  is 
therefore  the  sacrament  and  the  thing  of  the  sacrament  (res  sacra- 
menti),  that  is  the  body  of  Christ." — See,  he  said  the  invisible  flesh 
of  Christ,  because,  it  is  received  and  given,  hidden  under  the  form 
of  bread.  Likewise,  he  said  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  the  sacrament 
and  the  thing ;  and  this  confirms  what  we  said  above.^  Then  he  adds 
what  moves  the  reader  more:  'That  is  his  flesh,"  he  says,  "which 
hidden  under  the  form  of  bread,  we  receive  in  the  sacrament ;  and  his 
blood,  which  we  drink  under  the  form  and  taste  of  wine.  That  is, 
flesh  is  the  sacrament  of  flesh  and  blood  of  blood ;  and  in  the  flesh 
and  blood,  both  of  which  are  invisible,  intelligible  and  spiritual,  is 
signified  the  visible  and  palpable  body  of  Christ,  full  of  grace  and 
divine  majesty." 

Pay  careful  attention  to  these  things,  because  Augustine  here 
uses  a  certain  figure  of  speech  in  which  things  which  signify  other 
things  often  receive  the  names  of  the  things  which  they  signify.  For 
here  the  visible  form  of  bread  is  called  by  the  name  of  flesh  and  the 
visible  form  of  wine  by  the  name  of  blood.  But  the  flesh  of  Christ 
is  said  to  be  invisible  and  intelligible,  because  in  that  form  the  flesh 
is  not  seen,  but  is  known;  so  also  the  blood.  The  invisible  flesh 
therefore  is  said  to  be  the  sacrament  of  the  visible  flesh  because  the 
form  of  bread,  under  which  that  flesh  is  not  visible,  is  the  sacrament 
of  the  visible  flesh,  for  by  the  invisible  flesh,  that  is,  by  the  form,  in. 
which  the  flesh  of  Christ  does  not  appear  as  flesh,  is  signified  the  body 
of  Christ,  which  is  visible  and  palpable,  when  it  appears  in  its  own 
form.  So  also  should  we  understand  in  the  case  of  the  blood. 
Augustine^  also  confirms  this  sense,  showing  how  the  preceding 

1  Dist.  VIII.  c.  7. — Passage  following  is  in  can.  cit.  and  in  Lanfranc,  loc.  cit. 
c.  14. 

*  Can.  cit.  but  §2.    The  last  passage  of  this  chapter  is  Augustine,  Epist.  98. 
(alias  23.)  ad  Bonifac.  Episc,  n.  9. 


^ 


,1 


DISTINCTION  X 


131 


statements  are  to  be  understood, — because  he  had  spoken  obscurely 
— saying  accordingly  that  the  bread  is  called  the  body  of  Christ  when 
really  it  is  the  sacrament  of  the  body  of  Christ  which  was  crucified ; 
just  as  that  sacrifice  which  is  performed  by  the  hands  of  the  priest  is 
called  the  passion  of  Christ,  not  in  the  actuality  of  the  fact,  but  in 
the  mystery  of  the  symbol ;  and  as  "Faith  is  called  the  sacrament  of 
faith." 

PART   II 

This  is  a  sufficient  reply  to  heretics  and  the  objections  of  those 
who  deny  that  the  true  body  of  Christ  is  on  the  altar,  and  that  the 
bread  is  changed  into  the  body  or  the  wine  into  blood  by  the  mystical 
consecration,  saying:  "Who  would  dare  to  eat  his  Lord?  Who  also 
would  dare  to  say  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  daily  formed  of  matter 
or  substance,  which  were  not  the  flesh  of  the  Virgin?" 

II.     Of  the  testimonies  of  the  Saints  by  which  he  proves  that  the 
true  body  of  Christ  is  on  the  altar. 

These  and  similar  objections  are  made  by  those  who  seek  eagerly 
the  natural  law  in  the  divine  mystery;  whose  perfidy  the  following 
testimonies  reveal.  For  the  Truth  says^ :  "Take  ye,  this  is  my  body." 
Also,  Ambrose^:  "If  the  prayer  of  Elijah  had  such  power  that  it 
could  bring  down  fire  from  heaven^ ;  will  not  the  prayer  of  Christ 
be  of  sufficient  power  to  change  substances?  Of  the  creation  of  the 
whole  world  we  read :  'That  he  spoke,  and  they  were  made,'  *  etc. 
Therefore  the  Word  that  is,  the  Son,  who  could  create  out  of  nothing 
that  which  was  not,  can  not  he  change  those  things  which  are,  into 
those  which  they  were  not  ?  For  it  is  not  less  to  create  than  to  change 
things  into  a  new  character."  Also:  "If  we  are  looking  for  the 
regular  order,  a  woman  is  wont  to  bring  forth  offspring  from  union 
with  a  man.  Therefore  it  is  evident  that  the  Virgin  brought  forth 
outside  the  order  of  nature ;  and  this  body  which  we  produce  is  from 
the  Virgin.    Why  therefore  do  you  seek  the  order  of  nature  in  the 


*  Matt.  26,  26. 

'  De  Mysteriis,  c.  9.  n.  52;  following  passage,  n.  53;  third  n.  54;  these  three 
passages  are  in  C.  Revera  mirabUe  (69.),  ibid.  §2. 
'Ill  Kings  I,  14. 
<  Ps.  148,  5. 


^32 


APPENDIX 


y 


DISTINCTION  X 


133 


body  of  Christ  since  he  himself  was  born  of  the  Virgin,  outside  the 
order  of  nature?" — Also:  "Before  the  benediction,  another  form  is 
mentioned,  after  consecration  the  body  is  signified.  Before  conse- 
cration another  thing  is  mentioned,  after  consecration,  blood  is 
named.  You  say  'Amen,'  that  is,  'it  is  true.'  What  the  words  say, 
let  the  emotions  feel."  Also,  Augustine^ :  "In  the  forms  of  bread  and 
wine  which  we  see,  we  honor  invisible  things,  that  is,  flesh  and  blood ; 
nor  do  we  regard  these  two  forms,  as  we  regarded  them  before  con- 
secration, when  we  confess  faithfully  that  before  consecration  they 
were  bread  and  wine  which  nature  formed ;  but  after  consecration, 
the  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ  which  the  benediction  consecrated." 
Also,  Ambrose^:  "Bread  is  used  on  the  altar,  before  the  sacred 
words,  when  the  consecration  takes  place,  the  bread  becomes  the 
flesh  of  Christ.  But  how  can  that  which  is  bread,  be  the  body  of 
Christ?  By  the  consecration,  which  is  performed  in  the  words  of 
Christ."  The  same:  "If  there  is  such  power  in  the  words  of  the 
Lord,  that  things  should  begin  to  be,  which  before  were  not;  how 
much  more  can  they  bring  it  about  that  things  which  were  should 
continue  to  be,  and  be  changed  into  something  else?  And  so  that 
which  was  bread  before  the  consecration,  now  after  the  consecra- 
tion is  the  body  of  Christ,  because  the  words  of  Christ  change  the 
creature ;  and  so  bread  becomes  the  body  of  Christ,  and  wine  mixed 
with  water  in  the  chalice  becomes  the  blood  by  the  consecration  of 
the  heavenly  words."  Likewise,  Augustine*^ :  "Just  as  the  true  flesh 
of  Christ  was  created  by  the  holy  Spirit  without  sexual  intercourse, 
so  by  the  same  Spirit  the  same  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  conse- 
crated from  the  substance  of  bread  and  wine.  The  body  of  Christ  is 
both  the  truth  and  the  figure:  the  truth,  inasmuch  as  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  are  made  from  the  substances  of  bread  and  wine  by 
the  virtue  of  the  holy  Spirit;  while  the  figure  is  that  which  is  out- 
wardly perceived."     Likewise,  Eusebius  Emissenus* :  "The  invis- 


*  Can.  Nos  autem  (41.),  ibid.;  cf.  Lanfranc,  loc.  cit.  c.  13. 

•Lib.  IV.  de  Sacram.  c.  4.  n.  14;  following  passage  ibid.  n.  15;  these  two 
passages  are  in  C.  Pants  est  (55.),  ibid. 

3  Can.  Utrum  sub  figura  (72.),  ibid.;  cf.  Paschasius  Radb.,  de  Corp.  et  sang. 
Christi,  c.  4.  n.  i. 

*  Can.  Quia  corpus  (35.),  ibid.  Verbotenus  in  Serm.  4.  de  Corp.  et  sang. 
Dom.  n.  3.  (among  the  works  of  Isidore  and  Jerome). 


r 


ible  priest  by  his  word  and  secret  power  changes  the  visible  creatures 
into  the  substance  of  his  body  and  blood."— From  these  and  from 
many  other  statements,  it  is  plain  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  on  the  altar ;  nay  rather  the  entire  Christ  is  there  under 
both  forms,  and  the  substance  of  the  bread  is  changed  into  his  body, 
and  the  substance  of  the  wine  into  his  blood. 


> 


I 


DISTINCTION  XI 


135 


Distinction  XI 

PART  I 

I.     Of  the  manner  of  conversion. 

But  if  anyone  asks  what  the  nature  of  that  conversion  is,  whether 
of  form,  or  of  substance,  or  of  some  other  sort;  I  am  not  able  to 
define.  I  know  however  that  it  is  not  of  form,  because  the  appear- 
ances of  the  things  remain  what  they  were  before,  and  the  taste  and 
the  weight.  To  some  it  seems  to  be  a  change  of  substance,  for  they 
say  that  substance  is  so  converted  into  substance,  that  the  latter 
becomes  the  former  in  essence.  With  this  opinion  the  foregoing^ 
authorities  seem  to  agree. 

But  others  make  the  following  objection  to  this  opinion :  if  the 
substance  of  bread,  they  say,  or  of  wine  is  converted  in  substance 
into  the  body  or  blood  of  Christ,  a  substance  is  daily  made  the  body 
or  blood  of  Christ,  which  previously  was  not ;  and  to-day  there  is  a 
body  of  Christ,  which  yesterday  was  not;  and  daily  the  body  of 
Christ  is  increased  and  formed  of  material,  of  which  at  its  conception 
it  was  not  made.— To  these  we  can  reply  as  follows :  that  the  body 
of  Christ  is  not  said  to  be  made  by  the  divine  words  in  the  sense  that 
the  very  body  formed  when  the  Virgin  conceived  is  formed  again, 
but  that  the  substance  of  bread  or  wine  which  formerly  was  not  the 
body  or  blood  of  Christ,  is,  by  the  divine  words,  made  his  body  and 
blood.  And  therefore  priests  are  said  to  make  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ,  because  by  their  ministry  the  substance  of  bread  is  made 
the  flesh,  and  the  substance  of  wine  is  made  the  blood  of  Christ; 
yet  nothing  is  added  to  his  body  or  blood,  nor  is  the  body  or  blood  of 
Christ  increased. 

II.    How  the  body  of  Christ  is  said  to  be  made  from  the  substance 
of  bread. 

"But  if  you  ask  in  what  manner  this  can  take  place,  I  will  reply 
briefly :  It  is  salutary  to  believe  the  mystery  of  faith,  it  is  not  salutary 


V 


> 


to  investigate  it."  *  The  fact,  therefore,  that  the  body  of  Christ  is 
not  increased  by  the  change  of  the  bread  into  it,  nor  the  blood  from 
the  change  of  the  wine,  should  be  ascribed  to  his  will  and  power, 
who  brought  forth  the  same  body  from  the  Virgin;  therefore  the 
one  substance  is  made  without  increasing  the  other.  Some  how- 
ever do  not  admit  that  the  substance  of  bread  ever  becomes  the  flesh 
of  Christ,  although  the  flesh  of  Christ  is  produced ;  as  flour  becomes 
bread  and  water  wine,  yet  we  do  not  say :  flour  is  bread  and  water  is 
wine. — But  others  admit  that  that  which  was  bread  or  wine,  after  the 
consecration  is  body  and  blood ;  yet  it  does  not  follow  that  the  bread 
is  the  flesh  of  Christ  or  the  wine  his  blood,  because  the  substance  of 
bread  or  wine,  after  it  becomes  the  flesh  or  blood  of  Christ  is  not  the 
substance  of  bread  or  wine,  but  the  flesh  and  blood.  It  therefore 
seems  necessary  to  distinguish  when  we  say :  the  substance  of  bread, 
or  that  which  was  bread,  now  is  the  body  of  Christ — for  remaining 
bread  it  is  not  the  body  of  Christ — but  being  changed  into  that  which 
it  has  become,  it  is  the  body  of  Christ.  Nor  do  we  say  that  the  sub- 
stance of  bread  or  of  wine  is  the  matter  of  the  body  or  blood,  because 
the  body  is  not  formed  of  it  as  of  matter,  but  the  former  is  converted 
into  the  latter,  and  is  made  the  latter.  Wherefore  Augustine^ :  **We 
call  that  the  body  of  Christ,  which  being  received  from  the  fruits 
of  the  earth  and  consecrated  in  the  mystical  prayer,  we  receive  in 
memory  of  the  Lord's  passion.  But,  since  through  the  hands  of  man 
it  is  brought  to  that  visible  appearance,  it  is  not  sanctified  so  as  to 
be  a  worthy  sacrament  save  by  the  invisible  operation  of  the  Spirit 
of  God." 

But  some  say  that  we  must  understand  the  conversion  as  f ollows^ 
that  under  those  accidents,  under  which  there  was  formerly  the  sub- 
stance of  bread  and  wine,  there  is  after  consecration  the  substance 
of  the  body  and  blood ;  but  so,  that  it  is  not  affected  by  the  accidents. 
And  thus  they  assert  the  said  bread  changes  into  the  body  of  Christy 
because  where  there  was  bread,  there  is  now  the  body  of  Christ. 
If  this  is  so,  what  then  becomes  of  the  substance  of  the  bread  and 
wine?  They  say  that  it  is  dissolved  into  the  earlier  matter,  or 
reduced  to  nothing. — But  others  have  thought  that  the  substance  of 


>  Dist.  X.,  last  chapter. 


*  Cf.  Alger,  Ide  Sacram,  c.  9;  what  follows  is  from  Sum.  Sent,  tr.  6,  c  4. 
« Lib.  III.  de  Trin.  c.  4.  n.  10;  and  C.  Corpus  et  sanguinem  (60.),  de  Con- 
secrat.  dist.  2. 


134 


136 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XI 


137 


bread  and  wine  remained  there,  and  that  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  were  also  there,  and  that  in  the  sense  that  the  one  substance 
is  said  to  become  the  other,  that  where  the  one  is,  the  other  is  also ; 
which  is  strange ;  and  they  say  that  the  very  substance  of  bread  or 
wine  itself  is  the  sacrament. — But  that  there  is  no  substance  there, 
save  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  is  clearly  shown  by  what  has  been 
said  above  and  by  the  following.    For  Ambrose  says^  :  *This  bread 
which  we  receive  in  the  mystery,  I  understand  to  be  that  which  by 
the  hand  of  the  holy  Spirit  was  formed  in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin 
and  which  by  the  fire  of  the  passion  was  baked  upon  the  altar  of  the 
cross.    For  the  bread  of  angels  is  become  the  food  of  men ;  where- 
fore he  says2:  'I  am  the  living  bread,  which  came  down   from 
heaven' ;  and  again-^ :  The  bread  which  I  will  give  you  is  my  flesh, 
for  the  life  of  the  world.'    For  from  these  two  sentences  it  is  clearly 
given  us  to  know,  that  that  bread  and  this  are  not  two,  but  the  one 
bread  and  the  one  flesh  without  doubt  become  one  body,  that  same 
truly,  and  certainly,  which  was  received  from  the  Virgin,  which  rose 
again  and  ascended  into  heaven."    Likewise  Gregory*  :  "Who  of  the 
faithful  can  doubt,  that  in  the  very  hour  of  sacrifice  the  heavens  are 
opened  to  the  voice  of  the  priest,  that  in  that  mystery  of  Christ  the 
choirs  of  angels  are  present,  that  the  highest  and  the  lowest  are 
joined  together,  that  the  visible  and  the  invisible  are  made  one?" 
The  same"* :  "In  the  same  moment  it  is  both  carried  off  into  heaven 
by  the  ministry  of  angels  to  be  united  to  the  body  of  Christ  and 
appears  on  the  altar  before  the  eyes  of  the  priest.     Just  as  the 
Divinity  of  the  Word  fills  all  the  world,  so  that  body  is  consecrated 
in  many  places;  yet  there  are  not  many  bodies  of  Christ,  but  one 
body  and  one  blood.    Therefore  whether  a  man  receives  more  or  less 
of  it,  all  equally  receive  the  body  of  Christ  entire."— After  the  conse- 
cration therefore  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine  is  not  there, 
although  the  appearance  remains.    For  the  appearance  of  bread  and 

»  Gathered  from  Lib.  de  Mysteriis  c.  9,  and  IV.  de  Sacram.  c.  4;  in  C.  Omnia 
quaecumque  (74.)    Cf.  Petr.  Chrysolog.  Serm.  67.  n.  10. 

*  John  6,  51. 
3  John  6,  52. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Dialog,  c.  58;  and  C.  Quid  sit  sanguis  (73.),  ibid.  §1,  and  §2.  also 
for  the  following  passage. 

*  Found  in  Alcuin,  de  Divinis  officiis  c.  40;  he  cites  Gregory,  but  the  words 
at  least  are  not  found  there. 


< 


> 


A^' 


i«  > 


wine  is  there  as  also  the  taste ;  wherefore  one  thing  is  seen,  another 
is  understood. 

PART   II 

III.  Why  under  another  appearance. 

Moreover  Christ  gave  his  flesh  and  blood  under  another  appear- 
ance and  ordained  that  it  be  thenceforth  so  received,  for  three  rea- 
sons, that  is,  so  that  faith  might  have  merit,  which  believes  those 
things  which  are  not  seen;  because  "faith  does  not  possess  merit, 
where  human  reason  permits  proof."  ^  And  also  for  this  reason, 
that  the  spirit  should  not  abhor  what  the  eye  discerns,  because  we  are 
not  accustomed  to  eat  raw  flesh,  and  drink  blood.  Also  because  it  is 
not  right  -that  Christ  should  be  eaten  with  the  teeth,  he  gave  his 
flesh  and  blood  to  us  in  a  mystery.  And  also  on  this  account,  lest  the 
Christian  religion  be  insulted  by  the  unbelieving.  Wherefore 
Augustine^ :  "Nothing  is  more  reasonable  than  that  we  should  re- 
ceive the  likeness  of  blood;  that  so  neither  the  truth  should  be 
absent,  nor  ridicule  should  be  made  by  pagans,  because  we  drink  the 
blood  of  a  slain  man."  Lest  therefore  this  should  happen,  "and  lest 
for  instance  there  be  some  sort  of  horror  of  blood;  we  receive  the 
sacrament  in  a  symbol." — From  the  preceding  it  is  now  evident,  why 
under  another  appearance  and  why  under  this  particular  one  the 
Lord  celebrated  this  sacrament,  and  ordained  it  to  be  celebrated  by 
us. 

IV.  Why  under  two  species. 

*  But  why  is  it  received  under  two  species  since  in  either  Christ 
is  contained  entire?  "That  it  might  be  shown,  that  he  assumed  the 
whole  human  nature,  that  he  might  redeem  it  all.  For  bread  is 
related  to  flesh,  wine  to  the  soul,  because  wine  becomes  blood,  where 
the  seat  of  the  soul  is  said  by  physicians  to  be  situated.  On  this 
account  therefore  the  Eucharist  is  celebrated  in  two  forms,  that  the 
receiving  of  soul  and  flesh  by  Christ,  and  the  redemptioin  of  both  in 


*  Gregory,  II.  Homil.  in  Evang.,  homil.  26.  n.  i ;  cf.  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  4. 

2  Can.  Utrum  sub  figura  (72.),  ibid.  §2.,  taken  from  Paschas.  Radb.,  de 
Corp.  et  sang.  Domini,  c.  13.  The  following  opinion  is  from  C.  Panis  est  (55.), 
loc.  cit.,  from  Ambrose,  IV.  de  Sacram.  c.  4.  n.  20. 


138 


APPENDIX 


us  may  be  signified."  ^  For  what  we  receive,  as  Ambrose^  says, 
"has  power  to  preserve  the  body  and  the  soul ;  because  the  flesh  of 
Christ  was  offered  for  the  salvation  of  our  body  and  the  blood  for 
our  soul,  just  as  Moses  foreshadowed  it.  The  flesh,"  he  says,  "is 
offered  for  our  body,  blood  for  our  soul,"  but  yet  "it  is  received 
under  both  species,^  because  it  is  effective  for  both,  because 
Christ  is  received  entire  under  both.  But  if  it  were  received  under 
one  only  it  would  signify  that  it  had  power  for  the  one  only,  that  is, 
soul  or  body,  not  for  both  equally.  But  under  both  species  Christ  is 
received  entire ;  nor  is  more  received  under  both  or  less  under  one 
alone."  "For  there  is  the  same  characteristic,"  as  Hilary*  says,  "in 
the  body  of  Christ,  which  formerly  existed  in  the  manna,  concerning 
which  it  is  said :  'Whoever  collected  more,  did  not  have  more,  nor 
did  he  who  got  ready  less,  have  less.'  "  ^  And  although  the  whole 
Christ  is  received  under  both  species,  yet  there  is  no  change  of  bread, 
save  into  flesh,  nor  of  wine  save  into  blood;  nor  should  they  be 
called  tzvo  sacraments,  but  one,  because  under  both  species  is  the 
same  thing  received ;  nor  ought  the  sacrament  be  repeated,^  because 
the  benediction  is  not  repeated  over  the  same  species;  nor  ought 
other  substances  be  offered  for  the  sacrifice  of  truth,  because  from 
others  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  cannot  be  consecrated. 

V.     IVhy  water  is  mixed  with  it. 

But  water  should  be  mixed  with  wine,  because  water  signifies''^ 
the  people,  who  are  redeemed  by  the  passion  of  Christ.  "Therefore 
the  Lord's  cup  according  to  the  precept  of  the  canons  ought  to  be 
offered  with  water  mixed  in  the  wine;  because  we  see  that  in  the 
water  the  people  are  understood,  and  in  the  wine  the  blood  of  Christ 
is  shown.  When  therefore  in  the  cup  water  is  mixed  with  wine,  the 
people  are  joined  to  Christ,  and  the  company  of  believers  are  united 
to  him  in  whom  they  believe,  which  union  of  water  and  wine  is  so 


*  Glossa  ad  I.  Cor.  ii,  26,  in  Lyranus. 

*  Comment,  in  I.  Cor.  11,  26;  see  Deut.  12,  23  (cf.  Lev.  17,  11.) 

*  Cf.  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  6,  whence  this  opinion  is  taken. 

*  Can.  Ubi  pars  (78.),  ibid.;  the  same  opinion  is  found  in  Isidore,  Serm.  4 
de  Corp.  et  sang.  Dom.  n.  8. 

»  Exod.  16,  18. 

*  Cf.  Sum.  Sent.  loc.  cit. 

'  Apoc.  17,  15.    Following  passage  from  C.  Cum  omne  (7.),  ibid.  §1. 


I 


DISTINCTION  XI 


139 


commingled  in  the  cup  of  Christ,  that  the  mixture  cannot  be  separ- 
ated. For  if  anyone  offers  wine  only,  the  blood  of  Christ  is  there 
without  us." 

But  if  it  be  asked,  whether  the  act  is  invalid,  if  water  is  left 
out ;  hear  what  follows  in  this  same  canon :  "The  cup  of  the  Lord,"  it 
says,  "cannot  be  water  alone,  or  wine  alone,  but  both  mixed."  Like- 
wise Cyprian^ :  "The  cup  of  the  Lord  is  not  water  alone,  or  wine 
alone,  but  both  mixed;  just  as  the  body  of  the  Lord  cannot  be  flour 
alone,  nor  water  alone,  unless  both  be  united,  and  kneaded  into  one 
loaf."  But  if  anyone  who  does  not  intend  to  introduce  heresy,  leaves 
out  the  water  by  forgetfulness  or  ignorance,  it  does  not  seem  that 
the  sacrament  is  invalid,  but  he  should  be  severely  rebuked.  For  the 
Church  of  the  Greeks  also  is  said  not  to  add  water.  Which  opinion 
it  seems  can  also  be  gathered  from  the  sayings  of  Cyprian.  For  he 
says:  "If  any  of  our  predecessors  either  ignorantly  or  in  simplicity 
has  not  given  heed  to  this,  which  the  Lord  taught  us  to  do  both  by 
example  and  by  precept,  he  can  be  pardoned  for  his  simplicity  by  the 
indulgence  of  the  Lord.  But  we  cannot  be  forgiven,  who  have  now 
been  taught  by  the  Lord  that  we  should  offer  the  cup  of  the  Lord 
mixed  with  wine  just  as  that  which  the  Lord  offered."— And  this 
seems  to  mean  that  if  anyone  simply  or  ignorantly  offers  wine  with- 
out water,  he  completes  the  sacrament.  But  water  can  never  be 
offered  without  wine  for  the  sacrifice,  nor  bread  unless  of  wheat, 
nor  a  grain  of  wheat,  unless  it  be  made  into  bread ;  because  Christ 
both  called  himself  bread,  and  compared  himself  to  a  grain  of  wheat.^ 
Therefore  what  was  said  above,  to  the  effect  that  wine  alone  cannot 
be  offered,  ought  to  be  explained;  for  it  allows  an  exception:  it 
cannot  be  done,  unless  it  is  done  in  simplicity  or  ignorance,  or  it 
cannot,  that  is,  it  ought  not  to  be  done.  To  some  persons  however 
this  rule  seems  to  be  universally  true. 

VI.     Of  what  stature  the  body  was  which  Christ  gave  to  his  dis- 
ciples in  the  supper. 

It  is  also  to  be  gathered  from  the  authorities  previously  men- 
tioned, that  Christ  gave  the  disciples  wine  mixed  with  water.    But 

»  Epist.  63.  n.  13,  and  C.  Sic  in  sanctificando  (2.),  ibid.    Below,  the  words 
are  from  ibid.  n.  17,  and  the  following  canon. 
'  John  6,  48.  and  12,  24. 


MM 


140 


APPENDIX 


t 


he  gave  his  body  of  the  nature,  as  he  then  had  it,  that  is,  mortal  and 
capable  of  suflfering;  but  now  it  is  received  by  us  immortal  and 
beyond  suflfering ;  yet  it  does  not  have  more  eflficiency .  The  Euchar- 
ist also  by  intinction  ought  not  to  be  given  to  the  people  for  a 
supplement  of  the  communion,^  because  Christ  is  not  said  to  have 
oflfered  a  sop  to  any  of  the  disciples,  except  to  Judas.  Judas  did 
not  then  receive  the  body  of  Christ,  but  only  bread;  for  he  had 
received  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  before,  with  the  other  dis- 
ciples. 


*  C.  Cum  omne  (7.),  ibid.  §1.    Concerning  Judas,  cf.  August.,  in  loan.  Evang. 
tr.  62.  n.  3,  and  Sum.  Sent.  loc.  cit.  n.  9. 


> 


«       /^ 


1 


Distinction  XII 


PART  I 


I.  Whereon  these  accidents  are  based. 

But  if  we  are  asked  concerning  the  accidents  which  remain,  that 
is,  concerning  the  appearance  and  taste  and  weight,  upon  what  sub- 
ject they  are  based ;  it  seems  better  to  me  to  confess  that  they  exist 
without  the  subject,  than  that  they  are  in  the  subject;  because  there 
is  there  no  substance,  except  that  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,, 
which  is  not  aflFected  by  these  accidents.  For  the  body  of  Christ  has 
no  such  form  in  itself,  but  such  as  will  appear  in  the  judgment. 
There  remain  therefore  these  accidents  subsisting  by  themselves  for 
the  rite  of  the  mystery,  for  the  support  of  taste  and  faith,  by  which 
accidents  the  body  of  Christ  having  its  own  form  and  nature  is 
hidden.* 

II.  Of  the  fraction  and  distribution. 

We  are  also  often  asked  concerning  the  fraction  and  distribution, 
which  seem  to  be  performed  there,  whether  they  be  real ;  and  if  there 
is  a  true  fraction,  of  what  thing  it  is,  or  wherein  it  is  performed. 
And  since  there  is  no  other  substance  there  than  that  of  Christ,  if 
this  fraction  is  in  any  substance,  it  seems  to  be  in  the  body  of  Christ. 
— But  on  the  contrary,  since  his  body  is  incorruptible,  because  it  is 
immortal  and  incapable  of  suflFering,  it  does  not  seem  that  the 
fraction  can  be  therein.  For  Christ  also  refuted^  the  carnal  under- 
standing of  the  disciples,  who  thought  that  the  flesh  of  Christ  just 
as  any  other  was  to  be  divided  into  parts,  and  torn  to  pieces  with 
their  teeth.  Therefore  some  are  of  the  opinion  that  there  does  not 
take  place  the  fraction,  which  appears ;  but  the  body  is  said  to  be 
broken,  because  it  seems  to  be  broken. — To  them  we  may  reply  in 
the  words  of  Ambrose^ :  "Nothing  false  must  be  thought  of  the  sacri- 


*  Cap.  I  from  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  4,  and  the  following  chapter  from  c.  8. 

2  John  6,  62. 

3  In  Glossa  ad  I.  Cor.  11,  24,  in  Lyranus. 

141 


142 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XII 


143 


fice  of  truth;  like  what  occurs  in  the  deceptions  of  the  sorcerers, 
where  the  eyes  are  deceived  by  some  delusion,  so  that  they  see  what 
is  not." — To  this  some  say :  **Our  sight  does  not  deceive  us,  nor  is 
it  deceived  as  it  would  be  if  we  believed  that  the  body  is  so  broken, 
as  it  seems  to  be,  nor  is  the  act  all  illusion,  because  it  is  done  for  the 
advantage  of  faith,  not  for  deception;  even  as  also  Christ  showed 
himself  to  the  two  disciples  on  the  way  in  the  form  of  a  stranger* ; 
yet  he  did  not  have  such  a  form,  but  'their  eyes  were  holden,  lest 
they  recognize  him.' — But  others  say  that  just  as  the  appearance  of 
bread  is  there,  and  there  is  not  the  thing  to  which  or  in  which  this 
form  belongs;  so  there  is  a  fraction,  which  is  not  performed  on 
anything,  because  nothing  is  there  broken ;  and  they  say  this  fraction 
is  done  miraculously  in  the  power  of  God,  so  that  there  may  be  a 
breaking  there,  where  nothing  is  broken. 

III.     Of  the  confession  of  Berengar. 

Others  teach  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  broken  and  divided  in 
its  essence,  and  yet  exists  entire  and  incorruptible.  They  assert  that 
they  gather  this  from  the  confession  of  Berengar,  who  confessed  in 
the  presence  of  Pope  Nicholas  and  many  bishops^  that  "the  bread 
and  wine  which  are  placed  upon  the  altar,  after  consecration  are  not 
only  the  sacrament,  but  also  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  and 
that  in  a  sensual  manner,  not  only  as  the  sacrament,  but  in  truth, 
they  are  handled  and  broken  in  the  hands  of  the  priests  and  are 
crushed  by  the  teeth  of  the  faithful." 

But  because  the  body  of  Christ  is  incorruptible,  this  fraction 
and  distribution  can  rightly  be  said  to  be  performed  not  on  the  sub- 
stance of  the  body,  but  sacramentally  on  the  form  of  the  bread,  that 
there  may  be  a  true  fraction  and  distribution  performed  not  on  the 
substance  of  the  body,  but  on  the  sacrament,  that  is,  on  the  species. 
But  do  not  marvel  or  taunt  if  the  accidents  seem  to  be  broken  when 
they  are  there  without  a  subject;  ahhough  some  assert  that  they  are 
founded  on  the  air!  The  true  fraction  and  distribution  are  there, 
which  are  performed  on  the  bread,  that  is,  on  the  species  of  bread. — 


*  Lk.  24,  16. 

'  Can.  Ego  Berengarius  (42.),  de  Consecrat.  dist.  2  and  Lanfranc,  de  Eu- 
charistiae  Sacram.  c.  2. 


r 


Wherefore  the  Apostle*  says,  'The  bread  which  we  break," — be- 
cause the  appearance  of  bread  is  there  broken,  and  divided  into  parts, 
but  Christ  remains  entire,  and  in  his  entirety  is  present  in  each  part. 
Wherefore  Augustine:  "When  Christ  is  eaten,  Hfe  is  eaten.  But 
who  would  dare  to  eat  his  Lord  ?  And  yet  the  Truth  inviting  us  to 
eat  says :  'Whoever  eateth  me,  lives  on  account  of  me.'  2  Nor  is 
Christ  slain  that  he  may  be  eaten,  but  he  gives  life  to  the  dead,  when 
he  is  eaten ;  he  makes  anew,  he  does  not  die ;  eaten  he  lives,  because 
dead  he  arose;  nor  when  we  eat,  do  we  divide  him,  and  this  is 
certainly  the  case  in  the  sacrament."  The  same^ :  "The  faithful  know 
in  what  way  they  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ ;  everyone  receives  his  part, 
wherefore  also  grace  itself  is  said  to  be  in  parts.  It  is  eaten  in  parts, 
and  the  whole  remains  entire;  it  is  eaten  in  parts  in  the  sacra- 
ment, and  the  whole  remains  entire  in  heaven,  the  whole  remains 
entire  in  thy  heart." — "Therefore  these  are  called  sacraments, 
because  in  them  one  thing  is  seen,  and  another  is  understood"; 
the  bread  is  seen  and  the  cup,  and  the  eyes  report  them  because 
moreover  faith  requires  to  be  taught:  the  bread  is  the  body  of 
Christ,  the  cup  is  his  blood. — From  these  authorities  we  under- 
stand that  the  fraction  and  the  parts  which  there  appear,  are 
in  the  sacrament,  that  is,  in  the  visible  form.  And  therefore  these 
words  of  Berengar  are  to  be  interpreted,  that  not  only  "in  a  sensual 
manner,  in  the  sacrament,  but  in  truth,  the  body  of  Christ  is  said 
to  be  touched  by  the  hands  of  the  priests;  and  broken  and  chewed 
by  the  teeth,"  in  truth  certainly  but  only  in  the  sacrament.  Therefore 
the  chewing  and  distribution  there  are  real;  but  in  each  part  is  the 
whole  Christ.  Wherefore  Jerome*  :  "Each  receives  Christ  the  Lord, 
and  in  the  single  parts  he  is  entire ;  nor  is  he  diminished  in  a  single 
portion,  but  he  oflPers  himself  entire  in  each."  Likewise  Hilary: 
"Where  a  part  of  his  body  is,  there  is  the  whole." 


*  I.  Cor.  10,  16. — Following  passage  is  not  in  Augustine,  but  in  Bede,  I.  Cor. 
10,  16,  and  in  the  Glossa  of  Lyranus;  in  C.  InviUU  Dominus  (70.),  ibid. 

*  John  6,  58. 

>  From  the  same  references,  and  C.  Qui  manducant  (58.),  ibid.;  same  ref- 
erence §2  for  the  following  passage. 

*  Can.  Singuli  accipiunt  (77.),  ibid.,  and  Alger,  I.  de  Sacram.  etc.  c.  15, 
which  is  taken  from  Gregory,  libr.  Sacrament.  Praefatio  Dom.  5.  post  Theo- 
phaniam  n.  174.    Following  passage  is  C.  Ubi  pars  (78.),  ibid. 


144 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XII 


145 


IV.     What  these  parts  signify. 

Moreover  as  to  what  these  parts  signify,  Pope  Sergius^  teaches, 
saying:  **Of  three  forms  is  the  body  of  Christ:  the  part  offered, 
poured  into  the  cup,  shows  the  body  of  Christ  which  has  now  risen ; 
the  part  eaten  testifies  to  him  as  walking  here  still  on  earth ;  the  part 
remaining  on  the  altar  to  the  end  of  the  Mass  signifies  the  body  lying 
in  the  tomb,  because  to  the  end  of  the  world  the  bodies  of  the  saints 
will  be  in  their  tombs."     And  just  as  these  parts  have  a  mystical 
signification,  so  also  the  fraction  is  the  representation  of  the  passion 
and  death  of  Christ,  wherefore  he  himself  says,  'This  do  in  remem- 
brance of  Me,2  that  is,  in  memory  of  my  passion  and  death."     For 
as  Ambrose  says,  '^because  we  are  freed  in  the  death  of  Christ,  we 
ought  to  remember  him  in  eating  and  drinking  his  flesh  and  blood." 
— But  let  anyone  beware  lest  he  receive  unworthily,  because  'he  eats 
condemnation  to  himself.*  ^    **For  this  is  not  that  bread  which  passes 
into  the  body,  but  the  bread  of  life  eternal,  which  supports  the  sub- 
stance of  our  souls."  *    'Therefore  so  live,  that  daily  you  may  de- 
serve  to   receive,"   and    may   not   approach   unworthily.      "He    is 
unworthy,   who  celebrates  the  mystery  otherwise  than  as  Christ 
taught,"  or  who  approaches  when  he  is  in  mortal  sin.     'Therefore 
although  there  be  deadly  sins,  in  order  that  they  be  not  mortal,  before 
you  approach,  forgive  your  debtors.     If  you  forgive,  it  will  be  for- 
given you ;  and  thus  go  safely.    For  it  is  the  bread  of  salvation,  not 
a  poison."    If  you  go  thus,  you  eat  spiritually;  "for  he  eats  spirit- 
ually, who  brings  innocence  to  the  altar." 


PART  II 


V. 


Whether  Christ  be  sacrificed  on  the  altar  daily,  and  zvhether 
what  is  done  by  the  priests  is  a  sacrifice. 

After  these  considerations  we  are  asked  if  what  the  priest  does 


*Can.  Triforme  (22.),  ibid.,  ex  Glossa  ad  I.  Cor.  11,  24,  in  Lyranus  and 
Sum.  Sent.  loc.  cit.  c.  9. 

*  I.  Cor.  II,  24;  cf.  Glossa,  ibid.,  and  Ambrose,  Commentary,  on  the  same 
passage,  v.  26;  also  C.  Quia  morte  (50.),  ibid. 

3  I.  Cor.  II,  29. 

*  Ambrose,  V.  de  Sacram.  c.  4.  n.  24;  the  second,  ibid.  n.  25,  cf.  C.  Non  iste 
pants  (56),  ibid.;  third,  Comment,  cit.  v.  27;  the  following  are  August.,  in  loan. 
Evang.  tr.  26.  n.  11,  and  C.  Panem  coelestem  (64.),  ibid. 


) 


y 


I 


I  . 


«r         /    (^ 


is  properly  called  a  sacrifice  or  an  immolation,  and  if  Christ  is  daily 
sacrificed,  or  was  only  sacrificed  once. — To  this  question  we  can 
reply  briefly,  that  that  which  is  offered  and  consecrated  by  the  priest 
is  called  a  sacrifice  and  oblation,  because  it  is  a  memorial  and  a  repre- 
sentation of  the  true  sacrifice  and  of  the  holy  immolation  made  on 
the  altar  of  the  cross.    And  Christ  died  once  on  the  cross,  where  he 
was  sacrificed  in  his  own  person;  but  daily  he  is  sacrificed  in  the 
sacrament,  because  in  the  sacrament  a  remembrance  is  made  of  that 
which  was  done  once.    Wherefore  Augustine* :  "We  are  certain  that 
'Christ  rising  again  from  the  dead,  dieth  now  no  more,'  etc. ;  yet,  lest 
we  forget  what  was  once  done,  it  is  done  again  every  year  in  our 
memory,  that  is,  as  often  as  Easter  is  celebrated.     How  often,  da 
you  suppose,  does  Christ  die?     But  the  anniversary  remembrance 
only  represents  what  was  done  aforetime,  and  moves  us,  as  if  we 
should  see  the  Lord  on  the  cross."    The  same^:  "Christ  was  once 
sacrificed  in  his  own  person,  and  yet  daily  is  he  sacrificed  in  the 
sacrament;  which  is  to  be  understood  thus,  that  in  the  manifestation 
of  his  body  and  in  the  distinction  of  his  members  once  only  he  hung^ 
on  the  cross,  offering  himself  to  God  the  Father  as  an  efficient  victim 
of  redemption,  for  those,  that  is,  whom  he  had  predestined."    Like- 
wise Ambrose^:  "In  Christ  the  victim  sufficient  unto  salvation  was 
once  offered.     What  therefore  do  we  do?    Do  we  not  offer  every 
day?     Even  if  we  offer  daily,  we  do  it  as  a  remembrance  of  his 
death;  and  the  victim  is  one,  not  many.    How  one,  and  not  many? 
Because  Christ  was  sacrificed  only  once.    But  our  sacrifice  is  a  copy 
of  his ;  the  same  and  always  the  same  is  offered,  therefore  this  is  the 
same  sacrifice;  otherwise  it  would  be  said,  because  it  is  offered  in 
many  places:  'Are  there  many  Christs?'     No,  but  one  Christ  is 
everywhere,  existing  here  complete  and  there  complete :  just  as  that 
which  is  everywhere  offered  is  one  body,  so  also  is  it  one  sacrifice. 
Christ  offered  the  victim;  and  we  offer  the  same  now,  but  what 
we  do  is  a  remembrance  of  his  sacrifice."    "Nor  is  it  repeated  be- 


^  In  Ps.  21.  Enarrat.  2.  n.  i,  and  C.  Semel  Christus  (51.),  de  Consecrat.  dist. 
2.     See  Rom.  6,  9. 

*  Can.  Semel  immolatus  est  (52.),  ibid.,  and  Alger,  I.  de  Sacram.  c.  16,  who 
took  his  opinion  from  Augustine,  Ep.  98  (alias  23)  ad  Bonifac.  episc.  n.  9. 

'  Can.  In  Christo  semel  (53.),  ibid.,  and  Rabanus,  Comment,  in  Epist.  ad 
Hebr.  10,  i ;  cf.  also  Chrysostom,  hom.  13.  on  the  same  passage  n.  3. 


I 


146 


APPENDIX 


cause  of  a  weakness  in  itself,  for  it  makes  man  perfect,  but  because 
of  our  weakness,  because  we  sin  daily." — From  these  quotations  we 
gather  that  what  is  done  on  the  altar  is  also  called  a  sacrifice;  and 
Christ  was  offered  once  long  ago,  and  is  offered  daily,  but  in  one  way 
then,  in  another  now ;  and  also  we  are  shown  what  is  the  virtue  of 
this  sacrament,  remission,  that  is,  of  venial  sins,  and  the  perfecting 
ol  virtue. 


DISTINCTION  XII  147 

approach  secure,  but  I  say  this  of  him  who  is  not  burdened  by  mortal 
sins." — "If  not  more  frequently,  at  least  three  times  a  year  let 
men  communicate,  unless  by  chance  someone  is  hindered  by  crimes : 
at  Easter,  that  is,  and  Pentecost,  and  at  Christmas."  "Let  all  there- 
fore communicate,  who  do  not  wish  to  be  outside  the  doors  of  the 
Church." 


i 


VI.     Of  the  cause  of  its  institution. 

For  this  sacrament  was  instituted  for  two  reasons;  for  the  in- 
crease of  virtue,  that  is,  of  charity,  and  as  a  medicine  for  daily 
infirmity.  Wherefore  Ambrose^ :  "If  as  often  as  the  blood  of  Christ 
is  shed,  it  is  shed  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  I  ought  always  to  receive 
it;  I  who  continually  sin,  ought  continually  to  have  the  medicine." 
Also  Augustine^:  "This  oblation  is  repeated  daily,  although  Christ 
suffered  once,  because  daily  we  commit  sins,  without  which  mortal 
infirmity  cannot  live.  And  because  we  fall  daily,  daily  is  Christ 
sacrificed  mystically  for  us."  "For  he  gave  us  this  sacrament  of 
salvation,  so  that,  because  we  sin  daily,  and  he  cannot  die  again,  we 
might  obtain  remission  through  this  sacrament.  Daily  he  is  truly 
eaten  and  drunk,  but  he  remains  whole  and  alive."  Likewise:  "It 
is  called  the  mystery  of  faith,  because  you  ought  to  believe  that  upon 
it  our  salvation  rests." 

If  moreover  anyone  asks  whether  we  should  daily  communicate, 
hear  what  St.  Augustine  says  of  it^ :  "Daily,"  he  says,  "to  receive  the 
Eucharist,  is  a  practice  I  neither  praise,  nor  condemn;  however  I 
urge  that  persons  should  communicate  every  Lord's  day.  But  if 
the  mind  is  in  the  disposition  to  sin,  I  say  that  it  is  rather  burdened 
than  purified  by  the  receiving  of  the  Eucharist.  And  although  any- 
one be  grieved  with  sin;  if  he  does  not  have  the  will  to  sin  in  the 
future,  and   makes   satisfaction   with   tears   and   prayers,   let   him 


*  Lib.  IV.  de  Sacram.  c.  6.  n.  28,  and  C.  Si  quotiescumque  (14.),  ibid. 

*  Can.  Utrum  sub  figura  (72.),  ibid.  5ii  and  Paschasius,  de  Corpore  et  sang. 
Dom.  c.  9.  Following  passage,  C.  Quid  sit  sanguis  (73.),  ibid.  §4.  Third,  ibid, 
immediately  above. 

» (Gennad.)  de  Ecclesiast.  Dogmat.  c.  23,  and  C.  Quotidie  (13.),  ibid.  Fol- 
lowing passage,  C.  Etsi  non  frequentius  (16),  ibid.  Third,  C.  Per  acta  consecratione 
(10.),  ibid. 


m 


\ 


jr- 

1 


Jf 


DISTINCTION  XIII 


149 


Distinction  XIII 

I.  Whether  this  sacrament  is  administered  by  heretics  and  excom- 
municated persons. 
We  are  also  often  asked  whether  wicked  priests  can  administer 
this  sacrament. — To  this  we  may  answer  that  some  priests,  although 
they  are  evil,  consecrate  truly,  that  is,  those  who  are  within  the 
Church  in  name  and  in  sacrament,  even  if  not  in  life;  because  the 
consecration  is  effected  not  by  the  merit  of  the  consecrant,  but  by  the 
word  of  the  Creator;  wherefore  Augustine^ :  "Within  the  Catholic 
Church,  in  the  mystery  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  nothing 
more  is  accomplished  by  a  good  priest,  nothing  less  by  a  bad  priest, 
because  the  consecration  is  not  by  the  merit  of  the  consecrant,  but  by 
the  word  of  the  Creator ;  and  by  the  virtue  of  the  holy  Spirit.  For 
it  must  be  believed  that  the  sacraments  are  administered  in  the  words 
of  Christ.  Just  as  it  is  he  himself  who  baptizes,  so  it  is  he  who  by  the 
holy  Spirit  makes  his  own  flesh  and  blood."  Also  Gregory^ :  "Some 
think  that  the  communion  of  the  body  is  less  sanctified,  if  priests 
officiate  whose  lives  seem  to  their  eyes  ignoble.  Alas!  into  what  a 
great  snare  do  they  fall,  when  they  believe  that  divine  and  occult  mys- 
teries can  be  made  more  sanctified  by  other  men,  whereas  one  and 
the  same  holy  Spirit  in  the  whole  Church  invisibly  sanctifies  these 
mysteries  by  his  operation,  and  blesses  them  by  his  sanctification ! 
Therefore  it  is  called  a  mystery,  because  it  has  a  secret  and  hidden 
dispensation ;  also  a  sacrifice  as  a  holy  thing  is  performed,  for  in  the 
mystic  prayer  a  sacrifice  is  sanctified  for  us  in  memory  of  the  Lord's 
passion.  A  sacrament  occurs  in  any  celebration,  when  one  thing  is 
accomplished  through  another  thing  so  that  we  receive  something 
of  the  thing  signified.  The  sacraments  are:  baptism,  chrism,  the 
body  of  Christ,  and  these  are  called  sacraments  for  the  reason  that 
under  the  cover  of  visible  things  the  divine  virtue  secretly  works 
the  salvation  of  the  same  sacraments;  wherefore,  they  are  called 
sacraments  from  secret  or  sacred  virtues.  The  sacrament  of  the  bread 
and  cup  is  called  Eucharistia  in  Greek,  interpreted  in  Latin  bona 
gratia;  and  what  better  than  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ?    Whether 

*  Can.  Intra  catholicam  (77.),  C.  I.  q.  i.  and  Alger,  III.  de  Sacram.  c.  8. 

*  Can.  Multi  saecularium  (84.),  ibid. — The  greater  part  of  this  passage  is 
found  in  Isidore,  VI.  Etymologies,  c.  19.  n.  38.  ff. 

148 


I 


V\ 


i 


therefore  it  is  dispensed  by  good  or  by  bad  ministers  within  the 
Church,  yet  it  is  a  sacrament,  because  the  holy  Spirit  vivifies  it ;  nor 
is  it  increased  by  the  merits  of  good  dispensers,  nor  lessened  by  evil. 
This  same  must  be  said  and  believed  of  the  body  of  the  Lord  and  of 
baptism  and  chrism;  because  divine  virtue  works  secretly  in  them, 
and  this  virtue  or  power  is  only  divine,  not  human  efficacy." 

But  those  who  are  excommunicated  or  clearly  branded  with 
heresy,  do  not  seem  to  be  able  to  perform  this  sacrament,  although 
they  are  priests,  because  no  one  says  in  his  consecration:  "I  oflfer," 
but:  "We  offer,"  as  if  in  the  name  of  the  Church.  And  therefore 
although  other  sacraments  can  be  celebrated  outside  the  Church,  it 
does  not  seem  that  this  sacrament  can  be.  Which  also  Augustine^ 
seems  to  teach  saying:  ''Consider  the  name,  and  observe  the  truth! 
For  it  is  called  the  mass,  because  the  heavenly  messenger  comes  to 
consecrate  the  vivified  body,  according  to  the  word  of  the  priest  when 
he  says :  'Almighty  God,  command  that  this  be  borne  by  the  hands 
of  thy  holy  angel  to  thine  altar  on  high,'  etc.  Therefore  unless  the 
angel  comes,  it  can  in  no  wise  rightly  be  called  a  mass.  For  do  you 
suppose  if  a  heretic  had  dared  to  usurp  this  mystery,  God  would 
send  the  angel  from  heaven  to  consecrate  his  oblation;  especially 
since  he  has  threatened  heretics  through  the  prophet  saying^:  'I 
will  curse  your  blessings.'  And  if  the  Truth  asserts  that  he  will 
curse  their  blessings  how  will  it  be  with  their  offering?  Therefore 
shall  we  say  that  the  offering  can  be  blessed  by  God,  when  we  know 
it  to  be  cursed  by  God  together  with  their  blessing?  For  if  God  has 
cursed  the  blessings  of  the  heretics,  and  a  schismatic  has  blessed 
them ;  which  of  them  will  prevail?  Do  you  suppose  that  the  blessing 
of  the  one  accursed  can  reduce  to  nothing  the  truest  words  of  the 
threatening  God?" 

From  these  citations  we  may  gather  that  a  heretic  cut  off  from 
the  Catholic  Church,-"^  is  unable  to  perform  this  sacrament ;  because 
the  holy  angels,  who  assist  in  the  celebration  of  this  mystery  are  not 
then  present,  when  a  heretic  or  schismatic  recklessly  presumes  to 
celebrate  this  mystery.    For  we  may  not  doubt  that  where  the  mys- 

*  Not  from  Augustine,  who  rather  with  the  common  opinion  teaches  the 
contrary.  Source  not  found.  Prayer  cited  is  in  the  canon  of  the  mass  after  the 
consecration. 

2  Mai.  2,  2. 

» For  the  following,  cf.  Bede,  on  Luke  24,  4. 


f 


150 


APPENDIX 


teries  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  are  performed,  an  assembly 
of  the  celestial  citizens  is  present.  Moreover  in  the  accomplishment  of 
this  mystery,  just  as  the  form  should  be  preserved,  so  must  the  order 
be  regarded,  that  is,  it  is  necessary  that  there  be  a  priest,  and  the 
intention  must  be  felt  that  he  intends  to  perform  it.— But  if  he  does 
not  believe  the  truth  concerning  this  mystery,  do  you  suppose  he  can 
intend  to  perform  it?    And  if  he  does  not  intend,  do  you  suppose  he 
performs  it?— Some  even  say,  that  if  he  does  not  think  rightly  of 
this  mystery  he  can  intend  not  indeed  to  perform  it,  which  would 
then  be  to  believe  rightly,  but  to  do  that  which  is  done  by  others  when 
the  mystery  is  performed,  and  thus  the  intention  is  present ;  and  even 
if  the  intention  of  performing  this  mystery  may  be  said  to  be  lacking, 
nevertheless  inasmuch  as  he  intends  to  say  and  do  things,  which  are 
done  by  others,  the  mystery  is  accomplished.     We  can  also  reason- 
ably say,  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  not  received  by  brute  animals, 
even  if  it  seems  to  be.     What  then  does  a  mouse  receive,  or  what 
does  it  eat?     God  knows.— Concerning  this  heavenly  mystery  we 
have  touched  lightly  upon  some  points  which  should  be  held  faith- 
fully by  Catholics;  for  whoever  contradicts  these  things,  is  judged  a 
heretic. 

II.     IVhat  constitutes  a  heretic,  and  ivhat  a  heretic  is. 

But  lest  you  be  ignorant  of  what  constitutes  a  heretic  or  what 
a  heretic  is,  hear  briefly  what  the  holy  doctors  teach  of  it.  Hilary 
saysi :  'There  have  been  many  who  recognized  the  simplicity  of  the 
heavenly  words,  not  the  perfection  of  the  truth  itself,  interpreting 
them  otherwise  than  as  the  virtue  of  the  words  demands.  For  heresy 
is  in  the  interpretation,  it  is  not  in  the  Scripture ;  and  the  idea  not 
the  discourse  becomes  the  sin."  The  same  in  the  seventh  book^ : 
"The  idea  of  the  interpretation  is  to  blame."  Jerome^  says  that 
"heresy  comes  from  words  quoted  without  regard  to  order."  Augus- 
tine, defining  what  a  heretic  is,  says*  :  ''A  heretic  is  one  who  produces 
or  follows  false  and  new  opinions  for  the  sake  of  some  temporal  con- 
venience and  especially  for  glory  and  pre-eminence  for  himself." 

»  Lib.  II.  de  Trin.  n.  3.— Following  passage,  ibid.  VII.  n.  83,  where  we  find 
his  words.    A  similar  idea  in  ibid.  VIII.  n.  4  and  1 1. 
*  See  preceding  note. 

■Not  found  in  Jerome.    Glossa  ad  Osee  2,  16.    (Lyranus.) 
•Lib.  de  Utilitate  credendi,  c.  i.  n.  i. 


> 


( 


^ 


Distinction  XIV 


PART  I 


I.  Of  penance,  and  why  it  is  called  penance. 

Next  we  must  discuss  penance.  Penance  is  needful  to  those  who 
are  far  from  God,  that  they  may  come  near.  For  it  is,  as  Jerome* 
says,  "the  second  plank  after  shipwreck";  because  if  anyone  by  sin- 
ning sullies  the  robe  of  innocence  received  in  baptism,  he  can  restore 
it  by  the  remedy  of  penance.  The  first  plank  is  baptism,  where  the 
old  man  is  laid  aside  and  the  new  put  on;  the  second,  penance,  by 
which  after  a  fall  we  rise  again,  while  the  old  state  which  had  re- 
turned is  disdained,  and  the  new  one  which  had  been  lost  is  resumed. 
Those  who  have  lapsed  after  baptism  can  be  restored  by  penance, 
but  not  by  baptism.  A  man  is  allowed  to  do  penance  often,  but  not 
to  be  baptized  often.  Baptism  is  called  only  a  sacrament,  but  pen- 
ance is  called  both  a  sacrament  and  virtue  of  the  mind.  For  there 
is  an  inner  penance,  and  an  outer:  the  outer  is  the  sacrament,  the 
inner  is  the  virtue  of  the  mind ;  and  both  are  for  the  sake  of  salva- 
tion and  justification. — But  whether  all  outer  penance  is  a  sacrament, 
or  if  not  all,  what  is  to  be  classed  under  this  name,  we  shall  investi- 
gate later.2 — With  penance  began  the  preaching  of  John  who  said: 
"Do  penance,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  "And  what 
the  herald  taught,  the  Truth  afterwards  preached,  beginning  his  dis- 
course with  penance." 

II.  What  penance  is,  and  what  it  is  to  do  penance. 

"It  is  called  penance  from  punishment,  for  by  it  a  man  punishes 
the  sins  which  he  has  committed.  The  virtue  of  penance  is  conceived 
in  fear."  Wherefore  Isaiah^ :  **By  the  fear  of  thee,  oh  Lord,  have  we 


^  Ep.  130,  ad  Demetriadem  (alias  8.)  n.  9;  cf.  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  10.  Below,, 
cf.  Eph.  4,  22.  24. 

*  Dist.  XXII.  c.  2. — Following  passage  of  Scripture  from  Matt.  3,  2  and 
see  also  4,  17. — What  follows  to  the  passage  from  Ambrose  is  from  the  Glossa 
ordinaria  ibid. 

» Is.  26,  18. 

151 


f 


152 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XIV 


153 


conceived,  and  have  brought  forth  the  spirit  of  salvation."  "More- 
over penance  is,  as  Ambrose^  says,  to  lament  past  evils,  and  not  com- 
mit again  what  must  be  lamented."  Likewise  Gregory^ :  "To  repent 
is  to  bewail  the  sins  committed  previously,  and  not  to  commit  what 
must  be  bewailed.  For  he  who  deplores  some,  so  that  he  may  commit 
others,  is  either  as  yet  ignorant  of  how  to  do  penance,  or  he  dissem- 
bles. For  what  value  is  there  if  he  bewails  his  sins  of  luxury,  and 
yet  pants  with  the  fever  of  avarice?" 


PART    II 


Some  persons  clinging  vehemently  to  these  words,  contend  that 
the  truly  penitent  cannot^  again  sin  to  condemnation ;  and  if  he  does 
sin  grievously,  he  did  not  earlier  do  true  penance.  This  view  they 
even  defend  by  other  testimonies.  For  Isidore  says* :  "He  is  a 
scoffer  and  not  a  penitent,  who  still  does  that  of  which  he  repents. 
Nor  does  he  seem  to  desire  to  call  on  God  humbly,  but  to  mock  him 
proudly :  'a  dog  is  returned  to  his  vomit,  and  the  penitent  to  his  sin.* 
Many  shed  their  tears  without  ceasing,  and  do  not  cease  to  sin.  I 
observe  that  some  have  tears  for  penance  and  have  not  the  effect  of 
penance,  because  in  the  inconstancy  of  their  mind  they  now  shed 
tears  in  remembrance  of  sin  ;  now  when  the  habit  reasserts  itself,  they 
commit  again  the  things  which  they  bewailed.  Isaiah  says  concerning 
sinners:  "Wash  yourselves,  be  clean."  He  is  both  washed  and  is 
clean  who  both  laments  the  past,  and  does  not  again  commit  the 
deeds  he  has  bewailed.  He  is  washed,  and  is  not  clean,  who  laments 
the  things  he  does,  and  does  not  forsake  them,  and  after  his  tears 
repeats  the  things  which  he  has  wept  over."  Also  Augustine': 
"Penance  is  vain,  which  subsequent  guilt  contaminates  entirely. 
Lamentations  are  of  no  avail,  if  sins  are  repeated.  It  is  of  no  value 
to  ask  pardon  for  sins,  and  repeat  the  sins  afresh."  Also  Gregory® : 
"He  who  laments  what  he  has  committed,  yet  does  not  abandon  it. 


*  (Among  his  works)  Serm.  25.  (de  s.  Quadrag.  9.)  n.  i ;  C.  Poenitentia  est 
(i.),  de  Poenitentia  dist.  3. 

*  II.  Homil.  in  Evang.,  horn.  34.  n.  15;  C.  Poenitentiam  agere  (6.),  ibid. 
»  Cf.  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  12. 

*  Lib.  II.  Sent.  c.  16  n.  i;  C.  Irrisor  (11.),  ibid.     Below,  see  II.  Pet.  2,  22, 
and  Prov.  26,  11,  next  Is.  i,  16. 

'  Rather  Isidore,  I.  Synonym,  n.  77;  C.  Inanis  (12.),  ibid. 

*  Regula  pastor,  p.  III.  c.  30;  C.  Qui  admissa  (14.),  ibid. 


^ 


subjects  himself  to  more  severe  punishment."  Also  Ambrose^: 
"There  are  men  who  think  that  penance  should  be  done  repeatedly, 
who  luxuriate  in  Christ.  For  if  they  did  penance  truly  in  Christ, 
they  would  not  think  that  they  needed  to  repeat  it  afterwards ;  be- 
cause, just  as  there  is  one  baptism,  so  there  is  one  penance." — 
These  and  many  other  authorities  they  use  for  the  support  of  their 
opinion.  But  Ambrose  says^ :  "This  is  true  penance,  to  cease  from 
sin."  And  again^ :  "It  is  of  great  profit  to  renounce  error."  "For  to 
free  and  purify  souls  steeped  in  vice  is  the  work  of  perfect  virtue 
and  heavenly  grace."  * 

And  therefore  it  may  be  certainly  defined :  penance  is  the  virtue 
or  grace  by  which  we  lament  and  hate  the  evils  committed,  with  the 
purpose  of  amendment  and  do  not  wish  to  commit  further  what  must 
be  lamented;  because  true  penance  is  to  grieve  in  spirit  and  to 
hate  the  offences. — Wherefore  the  preceding  words:  "to  do  pen- 
ance is  to  bewail  what  has  been  done  and  not  to  commit  what 
must  be  bewailed,"  may  be  thus  rightly  understood,  that  they  refer 
not  to  different  times,  but  to  the  same  time,  so  that  at  the  time  a 
man  bewails  the  sins  committed,  he  does  not  commit  in  will  or 
in  deed  what  he  must  bewail ;  this  is  implied  in  the  following  words : 
"For  whoever  thus  deplores  some  things,"  etc.  Hence  Augustine 
says^:  "We  must  beware,  lest  anyone  suppose  that  he  may  daily 
perpetrate  these  heinous  offences,  and  redeem  them  by  alms- 
giving, who  do  such  things  'shall  not  possess  the  kingdom  of 
God.'  For  life  must  be  changed  to  better,  and  by  almsgiving  God 
may  be  propitiated  for  past  sins,  but  not  bought  in  any  way,  so  as  to 
allow  wrongs  to  be  committed  with  impunity.  For  to  no  one  did  he 
give  freedom  to  sin,  even  if  by  lamenting  he  wiped  out  sins  com- 
mitted, when  the  proper  satisfaction  was  not  neglected."  Also  Pope 
Pius«:  "It  is  of  no  profit  to  a  man  to  fast  and  pray,  and  to  do  the 
other  acts  of  religion,  unless  he  recalls  his  mind  from  iniquity."— 

» Lib.  II.  de  Poenitentia,  c.  10.  n.  95;  C.  Reperiuntur  (2.),  ibid. 

*  Among  his  works,  on  II.  Ep.  ad  Cor.  2,7. 
3  Exposit.  in  Ps.  118,  Serm.  22.  n.  2. 

*  Ibid.  n.  3. 

6  Enchirid.  c.  70.  n.  19;  C.  Sane  cavendum  est  (18.),  ibid.  See  I.  Cor.  6, 
9.  10. 

«  Ep.  I,  and  C.  Nihil  prodest  (21.),  ibid. — Following  is  taken  from  the 
Summa  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  12. 


154 


APPENDIX 


( 


DISTINCTION  XIV 


155 


Whoever  therefore  so  recalls  his  mind  from  evil,  that  he  laments 
what  was  committed,  and  does  not  wish  to  commit  what  must  be 
lamented,  and  does  not  neglect  to  make  satisfaction,  does  penance 
truly.  N^or  can  it  be  said  that  it  was  not  true  penance,  if  after- 
wards, not  purposely,  but  accidentally,  or  through  infirmity,  he  may 
perhaps  sin.  But  he  is  a  scoffer  and  not  a  penitent  who  laments  what 
he  has  committed,  in  such  a  way  that  he  does  not  cease  to  commit  in 
word  and  deed  what  he  has  lamented.  He  who  repeats  after  tears 
what  he  has  bewailed,  is  washed  for  the  time  being,  but  is  not  clean, 
that  is,  the  cleansing  is  not  sufficient  for  him  unto  salvation,  because 
it  is  momentary,  not  permanent.  And  also  this  statement:  ''Penance 
is  in  vain,  which  succeeding  sin  stains,"  is  thus  to  be  interpreted :  It 
is  in  vain,  that  is,  wanting  in  the  fruit  of  that  penance,  which  suc- 
ceeding sin  stains.  For  the  fruit  of  penance  is  the  avoiding  of 
gehenna  and  the  attainment  of  glory.  And  that  penance  and  other 
preceding  good  deeds  are  annihilated  by  the  succeeding  sin,  so  that 
they  do  not  obtain  the  reward  which  they  deserved  when  they  were 
done,  and  which  they  would  have  had  if  sin  had  not  followed.  But 
if  penance  be  done  also  for  that  following  sin,  both  the  penance 
which  preceded  and  the  other  previous  good  deeds  revive;  but  only 
those  which  sprang  from  charity.  For  those  deeds  alone  live,  which 
are  done  in  charity ;  and  on  that  account  if  they  are  annihilated  by 
following  sins,  they  may  revive  by  subsequent  penance.  But  those 
deeds  which  are  done  without  charity  are  brought  forth  dead  and 
void;  and  therefore  they  are  not  able  to  revive  by  penance.  Sim- 
ilarly this  saying  is  to  be  understood:  ''Lamentations  avail  nothing," 
etc. ;  and  this :  "Nothing  is  able,"  etc.  For  if  sins  are  repeated,  pre- 
ceding lamentation  avails  nothing  for  salvation  or  for  pardon  in  the 
end,  because  nothing  is  left  of  the  cleanness  of  life;  because  either 
the  sins  which  have  been  remitted  return,  as  some  think  when  they 
are  repeated ;  or  if  they  do  not  return,  and  even  though  they  are  for- 
given, the  man  becomes  as  guilty  and  unclean  on  account  of  ingrati- 
tude, since  he  is  still  involved  in  sins  to  be  expiated,  as  if  the  sins 
already  forgiven  returned.  This  question  however,  that  is,  whether 
sins  return,  we  shall  treat  more  fully  afterwards.^  Likewise  it 
avails  nothing  for  obtaining  salvation,  or  for  having  cleanness  of  life, 
to  ask  pardon  for  evils  done,  and  then  to  repeat  afresh  the  evils. — In 


/ 


I 


this  way  must  be  understood  that  which  Augustine^  says  elsewhere: 
"Penance  is  a  sort  of  vengeance  of  the  one  who  grieves,  always 
punishing  in  himself  what  he  grieves  to  have  committed."  And 
below:  "We  should  grieve  daily  for  sin,  as  the  very  nature  of  the 
word  declares.  For  to  do  penance  is  to  do  punishment,^  so  that  one 
may  always  punish  in  himself  by  vengeance  what  he  committed  by 
sinning.  Now  he  does  punishment,  who  always  avenges  what  he- 
laments  that  he  has  committed."  "What  remains  to  us,  except  to 
lament  in  life?  for  where  grief  is  ended,  penance  also  is  lacking. 
But  if  penance  is  ended,  what  is  left  of  pardon?  Let  a  man  praise 
and  hope  for  grace  only  as  long  as  he  is  sustained  by  penance.  For 
the  Lord  says-^ :  'Go,  and  do  not  desire  to  sin  any  more.'  He  did  not 
say,  do  not  sin,  but  let  not  the  will  to  sin  rise  in  you.  How  will  this 
commandment  be  observed,  unless  grief  be  continually  preserved  in 
penance?  I>ut  let  a  man  always  grieve,  and  rejoice  in  grief;  and 
let  it  not  be  enough  that  he  should  grieve,  but  let  him  grieve  from 
faith,  and  let  him  grieve  that  he  has  not  always  grieved." 

Of  the  penance  of  the  perfect,  sufficing  even  unto  salvation,  we 
must  understand  what  I  said  above,  that  is:  "Penance  is  a  vengeance 
always  punishing  what  one  has  committed" ;  and  other  things  of  the 
same  sort.  But  this  statement:  "If  penance  is  finished,  nothing  is 
left  of  pardon,"  may  be  received  in  two  ways.  For  if  according  to. 
the  belief  of  some  persons,  sins  which  have  been  forgiven  return,  it 
is  easy  to  understand  that  nothing  of  pardon  is  left;  because  the 
sins  forgiven  are  again  repeated.  For  just  as  one  who  is  manu- 
mitted from  slavery  into  freedom,  for  a  time^  is  truly  free,  and  yet 
on  account  of  an  offense  is  afterward  returned  to  slavery;  so  also- 
sins  are  truly  remitted  in  penance,  and  yet  on  account  of  the  repeti- 
tion of  the  offense  they  return  again. — But  if  the  sins  are  said  not  to* 
return,  it  may  reasonably  be  said  also  that  nothing  of  pardon  is  left,, 
not  because  forgiven  sins  are  imputed  again,  but  because  on  account 


»  Dist.  XXII.  c.  I. 


1  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  (among  his  works),  c.  8.  n.  22;  following  pas- 
sage, ibid.  c.  19.  n.  35;  both  in  C.  Poenitentia  est  (4.),  ibid.  Third,  ibid.  c.  13.  n. 
28;  C.  Si  Apostolus  (5.),  ibid. 

2  The  play  on  words  is  lost  in  the  English.  The  Pseudo- Augustine  saysi 
Pnenitere  enim  est  poenam  tenere  .  .  . 

*  John  8,11. 

*  Or,  again,  as  Gratian  in  C.  Quamvis  cautc  (22.),  ibid.,  from  which  this 
whole  explanation  is  excerpted. 


»\ 


156 


APPENDIX 


of  ingratitude  the  man  becomes  as  guilty  and  unclean,  as  if  they  did 
return. 

III.     Of  the  solemn  and  single  penance. 

Moreover  that  which  Ambrose  says,  They  are  repeated,  etc.; 
and :  Just  as  there  is  one  baptism,  so  also  there  is  one  penance,  is  to 
be  understood  not  of  the  general,  but  of  the  special  custom  of  the 
Church  for  solemn  penance,  which  among  some  people  is  once  cele- 
brated and  not  repeated.     Also  this  other  passage  of  Ambrose^ : 
'Tenance  once  performed  but  not  truly  celebrated,  both  robs  an 
earlier  penance  of  its  fruit  and  destroys  the  value  of  a  later" ;  is  to 
be  understood  of  solemn  penance.    But  solemn  penance,  as  Ambrose 
says  in  the  same  passage,  is  that  which  is  done  outside  the  Church, 
in  public,  in  ashes  and  sack-cloth,  and  which  is  only  imposed  for 
grievous  and  horrible  and  public  sins.    And  this  is  not  to  be  repeated, 
for  reverence  of  the  sacrament  that  it  may  not  become  worthless  or 
be  made  contemptible  to  men.    Wherefore  Augustine^ :  "Although  it 
is  provided  wisely  and  wholesomely  that  an  opportunity  for  this 
humble  penance  be  only  once  granted  in  the  Church,  lest  the  medicine 
be  cheap  or  less  useful  for  the  sick,  which  is  the  more  wholesome, 
the  less  it  is  despised ;  who  would  yet  dare  to  say  to  God :  'Why  dost 
thou  spare  again  the  man  who  after  his  first  penance  again  binds  him- 
self in  the  snares  of  iniquity  ?'  "  Origen^  also  says  of  this  solemn  pen- 
ance, which  is  enjoined  for  more  serious  offences:  "If  some  mortal 
guilt  has  befallen  us,  which  does  not  consist  of  mortal  crime,  or  of 
blasphemy  against  the  faith,  but  of  some  offence  of  speech  or  char- 
acter; this  guilt  can  always  be  repaired,  nor  is  it  forbidden  to  do 
penance  for  such  things ;  but  not  so  for  more  grievous  offences.    For 
more  grievous  offences  an  opportunity  for  penance  is  only  granted 
once.     The  common  errors  which  we   frequently  commit,  always 
accept  of  penance,  and  always  are  redeemed." — By  common  sins  he 
means  venial  sins,  and  perhaps  some  mortal  sins  less  grievous  than 
others,   which,  as  they  are  often  committed,   are    frequently   also 


^Lib.  II.  de  Poenitentia,  c.  ii.  n.  104;  C.  In  salicihus  (37.),  ibid.;  cf.  Sum. 
Sect.  tr.  6.  c.  12. 

*  Ep.  153.  (alias  54.)  ad  Macedonium,  c.  3.  n.  7;  C.  Quamvis  caute,  supra  cit. 

*  Homil.  15.  in  Levit.  (25,  29.)  n.  2;  the  Master  having  omitted  much  else, 
added  the  words:  but  not  so  concerning  more  grievous  offences. 


f 


X 


\, 


\? 


DISTINCTION  XIV 


157 


redeemed  through  penance.  But  penance  is  done  only  once  for  more 
serious  offences,  that  is  the  solemn  penance.  For  these  sins  also,  if 
they  are  repeated,  penance  is  repeated,  but  not  the  solemn  penance^ 
but  this  rule  however  is  not  observed  in  some  Churches. 

IV.     That  sins  arc  forgiven  frequently  by  penance. 

But  that  penance  is  done  not  once  only,  but  is  frequently  re- 
peated, and  by  it  frequently  pardon  is  again  afforded ;  is  proved  by 
many  testimonies  of  the  saints.  For  Augustine^  says,  writing  against 
certain  heretics  who  asserted  that  penance  was  useful  only  once  for 
those  who  sin  after  baptism :  "The  faithless  still  assail  us,  who  know 
more  than  they  should,  not  sober,  but  out  of  bounds ;  they  say :  'And 
if  penance  has  value  for  those  who  sin  once  after  baptism,  yet 
repeated  it  is  not  of  value  to  those  who  sin  often ;  otherwise  remis- 
sion would  be  an  encouragement  to  sin.'  For  they  say :  'Who  would 
not  always  sin,  if  he  could  always  be  restored  through  penance?' 
For  they  call  the  Lord  an  encourager  of  evil,  if  he  always  aids  sin- 
ners; and  says  that  sins  are  pleasing  to  him,  for  which  grace  is 
always  at  hand.  But  they  err.  For  it  is  evident  that  sins  much  dis- 
please him,  who  is  always  ready  to  destroy  them;  if  he  loved 
them,  he  would  not  always  destroy  them."  The  same  to  Mace- 
donius- :  "To  such  lengths  does  the  iniquity  of  men  sometimes 
go,  even  after  penance  has  been  performed,  and  reconciliation 
to  the  altar,  they  commit  either  similar  or  more  grievous  sins. 
And  yet  God  causes  his  sun  to  rise  even  upon  them,  nor  does 
he  grant  less  freely  than  before  the  most  abundant  gifts  of  Hfe 
and  salvation.  And  although  an  opportunity  for  penance  is  not 
granted  them  in  the  Church,  yet  God  does  not  forget  his  patience 
towards  them.  If  anyone  of  their  number  should  say  to  you:  Tell 
me  whether  it  avails  anything  for  a  future  life,  if  in  this  Hfe  I  have 
contempt  for  the  most  enticing  allurements  of  pleasure,  if  I  distress 
myself  more  vehemently  than  before  by  doing  penance,  if  I  weep 
more  copiously,  if  I  live  better,  if  I  help  the  poor  more  abundantly, 
if  I  am  aflame  more  ardently  with  charity ;  who  of  you  would  be  so 


1  Lib.  de  vera  et  falsa  poenitentia,  c.  5.  n.  11;  C.  Adhuc  instant  (32.),  ibid. 
See  Rom.  12,  3. 

*  Ep.  153.  (alias  54.)  ad  Macedonium,  c.  3.  n.  7;  C.  In  tantum  (33.),  ibid. 
See  Matt.  5,  45. 


158 


APPENDIX 


foolish  as  to  say  to  this  man :  These  things  will  profit  you  nothing 
in  the  future?  Go,  at  least  enjoy  the  pleasantness  of  this  life.  May 
God  avert  such  monstrous  and  sacrilegious  madness."  Also  John 
ChrysostomS  on  the  restoration  of  the  fallen:  "Such,  believe  me, 
such  is  the  pity  of  God  towards  men :  never  does  he  s|)urn  penance, 
if  it  be  offered  him  sincerely  and  in  simplicity;  even  if  a  man  reach 
the  extreme  of  wickedness,  and  wishes  then  to  return  to  the  life  of 
virtue ;  he  receives  him  freely  and  embraces  him,  and  does  everything 
until  he  brings  him  back  to  his  former  state.  And  what  is  still  more 
excellent  and  more  extraordinary,  even  if  one  is  not  able  to  perform 
the  whole  order  of  rendering  satisfaction,  he  does  not  reject  a  pen- 
ance, however  small  and  done  in  however  short  a  time ;  he  accepts 
even  that,  nor  does  he  sufifer  the  reward  of  conversion,  however 
humble,  to  be  lost."  This  same  view  may  also  be  supported  by  ex- 
amples. For  David,-  by  penance,  obtained  pardon  at  the  same  time 
for  adultery  and  murder;  and  yet  afterwards  he  sinned  grievously  in 
the  numbering  of  the  people,  as  was  shown  by  the  multitude  of  the 
people  destroyed.  "But  this  is  admirable,  that  he  offered  him- 
self to  the  angel  who  smote  the  people  saying,  'Let  thy  hand  be 
turned  upon  me.  and  upon  my  father's  house.'  When  he  had  done 
this,  he  was  immediately  judged  worthy  of  sacrifice,  though  he  had 
been  judged  unw^orthy  of  absolution.  Nor  is  it  strange  if  by  so  great 
an  oblation  of  himself,  for  the  people,  he  obtained  pardon  of  sin 
for  himself ;  since  Moses  by  offering  himself  for  the  error  of  the 
people,  removed  their  sins."  ^ 

From  these  and  from  many  other  testimonies  it  is  clearly  shown, 
that  by  penance  not  only  once,  but  often,  we  rise  from  our  sins,  and 
that  true  penance  may  be  done  repeatedly.  **For  if  we  sin  wilfully," 
as  says  the  Apostle,^  "there  is  now  left  no  sacrifice  for  sins,"  that 
is,  because  once  only  must  Christ  have  to  suffer;  nor  is  a  second 
baptism  left ;  but  there  is  left  a  second  penance,  and  a  third,  and  after 
that  another,  as  John  Chrysostom^  says  on  this  passage:  "It  must 


^  Lib.  I.    Ad  Theodorum  lapsum  adhoratio  n.  6;  C.  Talis  mihi  (28.),  ibid. 

2  II.  Kings  12,  13. 

3  Ambrose,  de  Apologia  David,  c.  7.  n.  38;  C.  lUud  vero  (26.),  ibid.    See 
II.  Ki.  24,  17;  I.  Paralip.  21,  17. 

*  Heb.  10,  26. 
^  Homil.  20.  n.  I. 


/ 


DISTINCTION  XIV 


159 


be  known,"  he  says,  "that  some  arise  at  this  point  doing  away  with 
penance  on  the  pretext  of  these  words ;  just  as  if  by  penance  a  sinner 
after  a  fall  could  not  rise  a  second  time,  and  a  third,  and  after  that. 
But  indeed  in  this  passage  the  apostle  does  not  exclude  penance  nor 
propitiation,  which  is  often  accompHshed  by  penance;  but  a  second 
baptism,  and  a  (second)  sacrifice." 


i 
^'^ 


1/ 


^^ 


i 


Distinction  XV 

PART    I 

I.     That  a  man  snared  in  many  sins  cannot  do  penance  truly  for  one, 
unless  he  do  penance  for  all. 

And  just  as  by  the  aforesaid  authorities  is  proven,  the  error  of 
those  who  think  that  penance  cannot  be  done  often,  and  deny  that 
sinners  rise  frequently  by  it  from  their  falls ;  so  on  the  same  author- 
ities is  overcome  the  opposition  of  those  who  assert  that  a  man 
ensnared  in  many  sins,  may  repent  truly  of  one,  and  may  obtain 
the  pardon  of  the  same  from  the  Lord  without  penance  for  another. 
Which  opinion  they  also  try  to  strengthen  by  authorities.  For  the 
Prophet  says* :  "God  will  not  judge  twice  for  the  same  thing,"  or, 
as  others  have  translated:  "There  shall  not  rise  double  affliction." 
If  therefore,  they  say,  anyone  confesses  to  a  priest  one  of  two  or 
more  sins,  and  completes  the  penance  for  it  enjoined  on  him  by  the 
priest  as  satisfaction,  having  kept  silent  about  the  other  sins,  he 
should  not  be  judged  again  for  the  sin,  for  which  he  has  made  satis- 
faction according  to  the  judgment  of  the  priest,  who  bears  Christ's 
power  in  the  Church.  For  if  he  were  judged  again  for  it,  the  Lord 
would  judge  twice  for  the  same  thing  and  there  would  arise  double 
affliction. — But  "this  ought  only  to  be  understood  of  those  persons 
who  are  changed  for  the  better  by  present  punishment,  and  thus 
persevere,  over  whom  there  shall  not  rise  double  affliction.  But  those 
who  are  made  harsher  and  meaner  by  lashes,  like  Pharaoh,2  add 
eternal  pains  to  the  present  ones,  so  that  temporal  punishment  is 
for  them  the  beginning  of  eternal  punishment.  Wherefore  Augus- 
tine: The  fire  is  kindled,'  etc., — that  is:  the  vengeance  shall  begin 
here — *and  will  burn  unto  utter  condemnation.'  This  must  be 
noted  in  opposition  to  the  persons  who  say,  that  'God  will  not  judge 
twice  for  the  same  thing'  applies  to  all  chastisement,  namely  that 


*  Nahum  i,  9. 

2  Exod.  c.  7.  f. — This  whole  passage  taken  from  Gratian,  C.  Sunt  plures 
(42.),  de  Poenitentia  dist.  3  §1,  and  C.  Ignis  succensus  est  (43.),  ibid.  See  Deut. 
32,  22.    See  Gregory,  (instead  of  Augustine),  XVIII.  Moral,  c.  22.  n.  35. 

160 


\ 


/ 


<. 


•  / 


r 


)  - 


7 


DISTINCTION  XV 


161 


some  are  corrected  by  chastisement  here,  others  are  punished  here 
and  forever." 

II.  For  zi'hat  reasons  chastisement  befalls  us. 

For  chastisement  befalls  us  in  five  ways :  either  that  the  merits 
of  the  just  may  be  increased  by  patience,  hke  Job ;  or  for  the  preser- 
vation of  virtues,  lest  pride  should  tempt  us,  like  Paul;  or  for  the 
correcting  of  sins,  like  Mary's  leprosy,  or  for  the  glory  of  God,  like 
the  man  born  blind ;  or  for  the  beginning  of  punishment,  like  Herod, 
that  here  may  be  seen  what  happens  in  hell,  according  to  this  say- 
ingi :  ''Consume  them  with  double  contrition,  oh  Lord."  "Therefore 
the  authority  of  Nahum  does  not  compel  us  to  believe  that  all  those 
evils  which  are  temporally  punished  are  not  to  be  punished  later  by 
God." 

III.  Of  the  Egyptians  and  Sodomites,  who  are  said  to  have  been 

punished  temporally,  lest  they  perish  forever. 

For  although  in  his  comment  on  this  passage  Jerome  says  that 
the  Egyptians  and  Israelites  were  punished  temporally  by  God,  that 
they  might  not  be  punished  forever,  yet  his  words  are  not  to  be 
taken  generally  of  all.  For  he  says^:  "Because  he  punished  the 
human  race  in  the  flood,  the  Sodomites  by  fire,  the  Egyptians  in  the 
sea,  and  the  Israelites  in  the  desert,  understand  that  he  punished  them 
temporally  for  their  sins  so  as  not  to  punish  them  forever,"  because 
God  will  not  judge  twice  for  the  same  thing.  Those  therefore  who 
have  been  punished,  will  not  be  punished  afterward;  otherwise  the 
Scripture  deceives  us,  to  say  which  is  a  sin. 

Attend,  reader,  to  these  words,  and  beware  lest  you  understand 
them  generally  of  everyone,  "and  not  only  of  those  who  did  penance 
under  the  scourge,  believing  on  the  God  of  the  Hebrews;  which 
penance  although  brief  and  for  the  moment,  God  does  not  despise."  ^ 
But  that  those  who  are  not  corrected  by  temporal  chastisement,  are 


*  Jer.  17,  18.  Above,  see  Job  i,  12  f.;  II.  Cor.  12,  7;  Num.  12,  10;  John 
9,  3;  Acts  12,  23.    Passage  from  Bede,  on  Matt.  9,  4. 

*Loc.  cit.  in  Nahum;  cf.  Gen.  7,  41;  19,  24;  Exod.  14,  28;  Num.  ii,  33. 
Here  almost  the  whole  chapter  and  the  last  proposition  of  the  preceding  are 
taken  from  Gratian,  cit.  C.  Sunt  plures. 

3  C.  Sunt  plures  (42.),  de  Poen.  dist.  3.  §1. 


{ 


1 62 


APPENDIX 


4 


punished  afterwards  eternally,  Jerome  shows  in  the  same  passage 
where  he  treats  of  a  believer  taken  in  adultery,  who  was  beheaded ; 
and  where  he  shows  that  trivial  sins  are  purged  by  brief  and  tem- 
poral punishment,  but  great  ones  are  reserved  for  long  and  eternal 
punishment,  as  he  say s^ :  "Should  anyone  ask  here,  if  the  believer 
taken  in  adultery  is  beheaded,  what  becomes  of  him  afterwards? 
For  either  he  will  be  punished,  and  the  saying  is  false :  *God  will  not 
judge  twice  for  the  same  thing';  or  he  will  not  be  punished,  and 
adulterers  ought  to  choose  to  be  punished  here  with  brief  penalty, 
that  they  may  escape  eternal  tortures.  To  this  we  reply,  that  God 
knows  the  measure  of  punishments  as  of  all  things;  and  that  he  is 
not  prevented  by  the  sentence  of  the  judge,  nor  does  he  lose  the 
power  of  inflicting  punishment  afterwards  on  the  sinner ;  and  a  great 
sin  is  atoned  for  by  great  and  lasting  tortures ;  but  that  if  a  man  is 
punished  temporally,  as  he  who  cursed  the  Israelite,  and  he  who 
gathered  fire-wood  on  the  sabbath,  such  are  not  punished  afterwards, 
because  a  light  offence  is  compensated  for  by  present  punishment. 
For  a  light  offence  is  compensated  for  by  light  punishment." — By 
these  words  Jerome  has  intimated  clearly  enough  that  grievous  sins 
both  are  punished  here  by  heavy  penalty,  and  in  the  future  must  be 
punished  eternally,  for  which  penance  is  not  done  during  chastise- 
ment ;  but  trivial  ones  which  are  here  punished,  receive  atonement 
by  light  punishment.  This  we  do  not  doubt  is  true  in  the  case  of  the 
good,  and  in  the  case  of  the  evil  perhaps  it  is  also  true. — Now  it  is 
evident  enough  that  what  they  quoted  from  the  prophecy  does  not 
support  them  who  say  that  a  man  who  keeps  a  crime  to  himself 
may  win  pardon  for  another  sin  by  penance. 

PART  II 

Also  they  cite  other  authorities.  For  Gregory  says^ :  **  'The 
Lord  rains  on  one  city,  and  does  not  rain  on  another' ;  and  the  same 
city  he  floods  in  part,  and  in  part  leaves  dry.  When  he  who  hates 
his  neighbor,  corrects  himself  of  other  sins,  one  and  the  same  city 
is  flooded  in  part,  and  in  part  remains  dry;  because  there  are  per- 
sons who  when  they  cut  off  some  sins,  become  grievously  hardened 


*  Jerome,  loc.  cit.  a  little  below;  C.  Quaerat  hie  aliquis  (44.),  ibid. 

*  Lib.  I.  in  Ezech.  horn.  10.  n.  23;  C.  Pluit  Dominus  (40.),  de  Poenitentia 
d.  3.     See  Amos  4,  7. 


V 


J^ 


DISTINCTION  XV 


16 


P 


--y 


in  others."  Also  Ambrose^ :  "The  first  consolation  is,  that  God  does 
not  forget  to  show  compassion" ;  "the  second  relates  to  punishment, 
where  even  though  faith  is  absent,  the  penalty  satisfies  and  raises  up 
again." — They  also  use  reason,  saying:  "If  he  w^ho  has  confessed  one 
sin,  and  kept  secret  about  another  has  fulfilled  the  satisfaction  en- 
joined by  the  priest;  do  you  suppose  that  if  converted  he  should  con- 
fess the  secret  sin,  penance  would  be  imposed  on  him  for  both? 
This  seems  far  from  reason,  and  from  the  custom  of  the  Church, 
which  imposes  penance  on  no  one  twice  for  the  same  sin,  unless^  re- 
peated. Therefore  the  satisfaction  was  sufficient  for  the  sin,  and 
therefore  also  it  seems  the  sin  was  forgiven." 

To  these  we  can  answer  as  follows:  The  saying  of  Gregory: 
**The  Lord  rained,"  etc.,  must  refer  not  to  the  pardon  of  the  offence, 
but  to  the  abandonment  of  sin^;  as  part  of  the  city  is  said  to  he 
flooded,  in  the  sense  that  the  man  now  ceases  from  the  act  and  de- 
light of  sin,  to  which  before  time  he  was  a  slave,  not  in  the  sense 
that  he  has  his  pardon.  And  the  rain  is  called  continence,  by  which 
he  is  recalled  from  the  work  of  sin,  because  it  is  instilled  in  his  heart 
from  the  fount  of  the  grace  of  God,  so  that  either  thus  little  by  little 
he  may  come  to  penance,  or  may  be  less  punished  by  God,  when 
otherwise  he  would  have  stored  up  torment  for  himself  from  lasting 
delight  in  and  doing  of  sin.  But  if  the  rain  be  referred  to  pardon 
of  guilt,  it  will  seem  to  be  contrary  to  the  saying  of  the  Gospel.* 
For  if  on  account  of  lack  of  pity,  when  a  man  has  not  pitied  his 
neighbor,  even  those  sins  which  have  been  remitted  are  repeated  for 
punishment,  much  more  those  sins  which  have  not  yet  been  remitted 
are  evidently  reserved  for  punishment  on  account  of  his  hatred  for 
his  brothers.  And  if  he  "who  is  appointed  master  of  his  own  will, 
is  not  able  to  begin  a  new  life,  as  Augustine^  says,  unless  he  repents 
of  his  former  life;  how  shall  he  come  to  the  newness  of  pardon  w^ho 


A 


*  In  Ps.  118,  sermo  18.  n.  3;  see  Ps.  76,  10.     Following  passage  ibid.  n.  2; 
C.  Prima  consolatio  (41.),  ibid. 

2  The  reason  given  by  the  defenders  of  this  error,  that  is  the  custom  of  the 
Church,  is  not  correct. 

3  The  whole  of  the  following  interpretation  is  taken  almost  literally  from 
Gratian,  C.  Quaerat  hie  aliquis  (44.),  ibid. 

*  See  Matt.  18,  32. 

*  Sermo  351.  (alias  hom.  50.)  c.  2.  n.  2.    In  the  following,  see  Ps.  18,  13; 
Rom.  14,  23;  I.  Cor.  4,  4. 


164 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XV 


16s 


II 


J 


1 


has  not  put  aside  the  old  robe  of  hate?'* — Also  the  saying  of  Am- 
brose: "Even  if  faith  is  absent,  the  penalty  satisfies,"  etc.,  is  not 
meant  of  the  faith  with  which  we  believe  on  God,  but  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  sin.  For  faith  is  absent,  when  the  sense  of  sin  is  not 
present.  For  since  no  one  knows  all  his  sins,  there  is  sometimes  in  a 
man  sin  of  which  he  is  not  conscious.  Wherefore  the  Apostle:  ''I 
am  not  conscious  to  myself  of  anything,  yet  am  I  not  hereby  justi- 
fied." When  therefore  someone  is  scourged  for  a  sin  of  which  he  is 
not  conscious,  if  he  bears  patiently  the  punishment,  and  humbly 
embraces  it,  thinking  that  by  chance  he  has  committed  a  sin,  which 
he  does  not  know,  and  for  that  he  is  being  punished  by  God,  the 
punishment  satisfies,  and  raises  up  again  the  one  afflicted.  But  as 
to  the  objection  which  is  made  concerning  this  satisfaction:  '*if  it 
was  not  a  satisfaction,  it  must  be  again  imposed;  but  if  it  is  not  to 
be  imposed  again,  it  was  a  satisfaction :  and  if  it  was  a  satisfaction, 
it  has  obtained  pardon" ;  we  can  answer  likewise  that  there  was  no 
satisfaction,^  because  the  man  did  not  bring  forth  fruits  worthy  of 
penance.  "For  the  satisfaction  of  penance,"  as  Augustine^  says,  "is 
to  remove  the  causes  of  sin,  nor  afiford  an  approach  to  their  sug- 
gestions." Also^ :  "Assuredly  those  who  Hve  wickedly  and  do  not 
care  to  correct  their  life  and  ways,  and  yet  amid  their  evil  deeds  da 
not  cease  to  give  alms  frequently,  deceive  themselves  in  vain,  on  the 
ground  that  the  Lord  says:  'Give  alms,  and  behold  all  things  are 
clean  unto  you.'  For  they  do  not  know  how  widely  this  reaches." 
"For  there  are  many  kinds  of  alms,  which  benefit  us,  when  we  give 
them.  Not  only  does  he  give  alms  who  gives  food  to  a  hungry  man, 
drink  to  a  thirsty,  and  the  like ;  but  also  he  who  gives  pardon  to  one 
seeking  it,  gives  alms,  and  he  to  whom  power  is  given,  who  corrects 
with  the  lash,  or  restrains  by  some  discipline,  or  prays  that  sin  may 
be  remitted  unto  a  man,  gives  alms,  because  he  excels  in  pity." 

IV.     Of  the  kinds  of  alms. 

"For  many  good  things  are  bestowed  upon  the  unwilling,  when 


*  See  Matt.  3,  8. 

*  (Gennadius)  de  Ecclesiast.  Dogmatibus,  c.  24;  C.  Satisf actio  poeniUntiae 
(3.),  ibid. 

'  Augustine,  Enchiridion,  c.  75.  n.  20.    See  Luke  11,41.    Following  passage, 
ibid.  c.  72.  n.  19.    See  Matt.  25,  37  ff. 


•^ 


^. 


t' 


their  profit  is  considered,  and  not  their  will."  ^  "But  this  is  greater 
when  from  the  heart  we  forgive  the  sin  that  someone  has  com- 
mitted against  us.  For  it  is  not  so  much  to  be  well-wishing  to  him 
who  has  done  you  no  evil.  This  is  much  grander  that  you  love  even 
your  enemy,  and  that  you  always  wish  him  well,  and  do  what  you 
can  for  him  who  has  wished  you  evil,  and,  if  possible,  has  done  it." 
"Therefore  when  the  Lord  says:  'Give  alms,  and  all  things  are  clean 
unto  you' ;  we  are  to  understand  that  to  those  not  believing  on  Christ, 
all  things  are  clean,  if  they  have  given  alms."  "For  whoever  wishes 
to  give  alms  methodically,  ought  to  begin  with  himself,  and  first 
give  them  to  himself." 

V.     What  alms  are. 

"For  alms  are  a  work  of  mercy,  as  is  most  truly  said,  'Have  pity 
on  thy  own  soul,  pleasing  God.'  "  ^  "They  do  not  therefore  deceive 
themselves,  who  think  that  by  abundant  alms  of  their  fruits  or  of 
their  riches,  they  buy  themselves  impunity,  and  continue  in  their 
sins,  which  they  so  love,  that  they  desire  to  remain  in  them.  'But 
he  who  loves  iniquity,  hateth  his  own  soul,'  and  whoever  hates  his 
own  soul,  is  not  merciful  to  it,  but  cruel.  Certainly  by  loving  it 
according  to  the  world,  he  hates  it  according  to  God.  If  therefore 
he  wishes  to  give  it  alms,  through  which  it  may  be  made  clean,  let 
him  hate  it  according  to  the  world,  and  love  it  according  to  God." 
By  the  alms,  which  a  man  owes  first  of  all  to  himself,  the  inner  man 
is  cleansed.  Christ  exhorts  us  to  this  and  says:  "Make  clean  the 
things  that  are  within.  For  nothing  is  clean  to  the  unclean";  but 
"their  mind  and  conscience  are  polluted,"  as  the  Apostle  says.  But 
all  are  unclean,  whom  faith  does  not  cleanse,  by  which  we  beheve 
on  Christ;  of  this  it  is  written:  "Cleansing  their  hearts  by  faith." 
"But  lest  it  seem  that  Christ  rejects  the  alms  which  are  offered  of 
the  fruits  of  the  earth;  'those,'  he  says,  'ought  to  have  been  done,' 
that  is  judgment  and  love  of  God,  'and  the  others  not  omitted,'  that 
is,  alms  of  earthly  fruits."  ^      I 


*  August.,  ibid.;  following  passage  ibid.  c.  73.  n.  19.  (Cf.  III.  Sent.  d.  XXX. 
of  the  Lombard);  third,  ibid.  c.  75.  n.  20;  fourth,  ibid.  c.  76.  n.  20. 

2  Ibid.;  following  passage  ibid.  77.  n.  20;  in  the  first,  see  Ecclus.  30,  24;  in  the 
second,  Ps.  10,  6. — Also  what  follows,  for  the  opinion,  is  ibid.  c.  76.  n.  20.  See 
Matt.  23,  26,  and  Tit.  i,  15;  next  Acts  15,  9. 

3  Ibid.  c.  76.  n.  20.     See  Luke  11,  42. 


i66 


APPENDIX 


VI.     Whether  those  who  remain  in  mortal  sin  and  vet  give  large 
alms,  should  be  said  to  make  satisfaction. 

From  these  testimonies  we  are  allowed  to  know  that  those  per- 
sons who  remain  in  mortal  sin,  even  if  they  give  large  alms,  do  not 
make  satisfaction  by  these,  because  they  do  them  out  of  order,  since 
they  do  not  begin  with  themselves.  Nor  is  such  work  properly 
called  alms-giving,  while  they  are  cruel  to  themselves,  and  not  pleas- 
ing to  God.  Therefore  that  must  not  be  called  satisfaction  for  sin, 
which  a  man  does  for  one  sin,  while  he  persists  in  another ;  because 
**to  fast  and  pray  and  do  other  good  works  is  of  no  avail,  unless  the 
mind  is  recalled  from  sin"  i :  and  if  at  length  the  man  is  converted 
and  confesses  the  secret  sin  to  a  priest,  satisfaction  must  be  imposed 
on  him  for  both,  because  he  has  not  mad^  satisfaction  worthily  for 
the  first. 

However  some  think  that  there  was  satisfaction,  but  unfruitful, 
while  the  man  persisted  in  another  sin;  however  its  fruit  was  re- 
ceived, and  he  will  begin  to  derive  advantage,  when  he  has  done  pen- 
ance for  the  other  sin.  For  then  both  sins  will  be  forgiven  and  the 
preceding  satisfaction  will  be  made  alive,  which  was  dead ;  just  as 
the  Baptism  of  a  man  who  assented  insincerely  to  it  is  of  value  for 
the  first  time  when  pretence  leaves  his  mind  through  penance.  And 
they  cite  authorities  in  defence  of  this  opinion.  For  Augustine 
says^:  "It  is  pious  to  believe,  and  our  faith  demands,  that,  when  the 
grace  of  Christ  in  a  man  has  destroyed  his  former  evil,  it  should 
also  reward  the  good;  and  when  it  has  destroyed  what  it  found 
was  not  its  own,  it  should  love  the  good  which  it  has  planted  in  the 
sinner."  Also  Jerome^^ :  "If  you  ever  see  a  man  do  some  just  works 
among  many  sins;  God  is  not  so  unjust  as  to  forget  the  good  deeds 
on  account  of  the  evil ;  but  he  will  have  these  which  he  has  planted 
in  good  soil  reaped  and  gathered  into  barns."— But  we  understand 
these  sayings  of  him  who  sometimes  does  good  things  in  charity, 
and  is  good,  but  at  some  other  time  is  evil  and  commits  many  sins. 
We  are  not  thereby  to  understand  that  he  has  done  just  works  among 
many  sins,  as  if  at  one  and  the  same  time  he  committed  sins  and 

*  Can.  Nihil  prodest  (21.),  ibid.— Interpretation  below  almost  word  for  word 
from  Gratian,  C.  Quaerat  hie  aliquis  (44.),  ibid. 

*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  (Pseudo- Augustine),  c.  14.  n.  29. 
3  Comment,  in  Aggaeum  i,  6. 


< 


DISTINCTION  XV 


167 


^'  h 


\  - 


V 


just  works,  but  that  at  different  times  he  has  done  both.  For  unless 
he  was  good  when  he  did  good  things,  it  would  not  be  said  that  the 
seed  was  planted  in  good  soil.  Therefore  when  the  offences  com- 
mitted after  good  works  have  been  wiped  out,  the  earlier  good  works 
which  were  done  in  charity,  and  which  the  offences  following  have 
killed,  will  come  to  life  and  be  rewarded  when  penance  has  been  done 
for  those  offences.  Wherefore  the  Apostle^ :  ''Laying  again  the 
foundation  of  penance  from  dead  works" ;  when  he  speaks  of  dead 
works,  signifies  former  good  works,  which  were  dead  through  sub- 
sequent sin,  because  these  persons  made  their  earlier  good  works 
of  no  effect  by  sinning.  Just  as  these  good  works  become  of  no  effect 
by  sin,  so  they  are  revived  by  penance,  and  begin  to  be  of  value  for 
the  winning  of  eternity.  Likewise  God  loves  the  good,  which  he  has 
planted  in  the  sinner,  in  him,  that  is,  who  has  sinned  after  his  good 
deed ;  he  does  not  continue  to  sin  and  do  good  at  the  same  time ; 
because  God  would  not  love  the  work  of  such  a  man  to  reward  it. 

VII.     Whether  good  works,  which  are  done  by  evil  men,  avail  for 
the  winning  of  life,  when  the  doers  are  converted  to  good. 

Moreover  this  view  may  be  accepted  of  the  good  works  which 
are  done  by  a  man  while  he  is  evil,  and  persists  in  mortal  sin  either 
for  a  time,  or  to  the  end ;  which  works  are  said  to  be  rewarded  by 
God  and  not  given  over  to  oblivion,  not  that  they  secure  life  eternal, 
but  help  towards  a  more  endurable  punishment  in  judgment;  as 
Augustine  says  of  faith  and  other  virtues  which  are  possessed  with- 
out charity^:  'Tf  anyone  has  not  the  charity  which  comes  from  the 
unity  of  the  spirit  and  the  bond  of  peace,  by  which  the  Church  is 
joined  together,  but  belongs  to  some  schism,  and  rather  than  deny 
Christ,  suffers  tribulations,  hunger,  persecution,  or  fire,  or  beasts,  or 
even  the  cross,  in  fear  of  hell;  his  conduct  is  not  to  be  blamed  in 
any  way,  but  on  the  contrary  his  patience  is  to  be  praised.  For  we 
cannot  say  that  it  would  have  been  better  for  him  by  denying  Christ, 
to  suffer  none  of  these  pains  which  he  has  suffered  by  confessing 


*  Heb.  6,  I. — This  whole  explanation  from  Gratian,  C.  Inter  mittentes  (19.), 
de  Poenitentia  d.  4. 

*  Lib.  de  Patientia,  c.  26.  n.  23;  C.  Si  quis  autem  (49.),  ibid.  d.  3.    See  Eph. 
4,  3.  and  below  I.  Cor.  13,  3. 


i68 


APPENDIX 


him;  but  we  ought  to  think  that  the  future  judgment  may  perhaps 
be  more  tolerable  for  him,  than  if  by  denying  Christ,  he  had  suffered 
no  pains  as  the  saying  of  the  Apostle:  *If  I  give  my  body  to  be 
burned,  and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me  nothing' ;  is  understood 
to  mean  that  it  profits  nothing  for  attaining  the  kingdom,  only  for 
receiving  a  more  tolerable  punishment  at  the  last  judgment."  And 
below^ :  "This  is  said  for  the  sake  of  charity,  without  which  there 
cannot  be  any  true  penance^  in  us ;  because  in  good  men  there  is  the 
charity  of  God  which  endures  all  things." 

From  these  statements  it  is  clear  that  good  works  which  are 
done  without  charity  profit  at  least  for  securing  a  more  tolerable 
punishment,  but  not  for  obtaining  life.  For  Ezekiel^  says  that  those 
deeds  which  a  man  does  in  charity,  if  he  falls  afterwards  and  does 
not  rise,  are  not  in  the  memory  of  God:  "If  the  just  man  shall  turn 
away  from  his  justice  and  shall  recommit  iniquity,  shall  he  live? 
All  his  justices  which  he  has  done,  shall  not  be  remembered ;  he 
shall  die  in  his  sin ;  and  the  righteousness  which  he  did  shall  not  be 
had  in  remembrance."  In  his  exposition  of  this  passage,  Gregory 
says:  "These  words  are  to  be  especially  considered  by  us,  because 
when  we  commit  evil  deeds,  we  recall  to  memory  without  cause  the 
good  deeds  we  have  accomplished,  whereas  during  the  perpetration 
of  evil  deeds  there  ought  to  be  no  confidence  reposed  in  past  good 
deeds." — This  saying  must  be  interpreted  that  past  good  deeds  do 
not  give  us  assurance  of  receiving  life,  even  if  they  do  of  milder 
punishment;  otherwise  it  would  oppose  the  preceding  authoritative 
statement  of  Augustine.  And  therefore  good  deeds  done  without 
charity,  and  good  deeds  done  in  charity,  but  attended  by  mortal 
guilt,  which  subsequent  penance  does  not  blot  out,  serve  to  win  a 
milder  punishment,  not  the  fruit  of  life. 

I  think  a  sufficient  reply  has  been  made  to  those  who  assert  that 
penance  may  be  done  and  pardon  given  for  one  oflfence,  when  an- 
other is  still  delighted  in  or  not  revealed  by  confession;  they  are 
confuted  not  only  by  previously  cited  authorities,  but  also  by  those 


*  Ibid.  c.  23.  n.  20,  and  can.  cit.  §1.    In  Augustine,  the  word  is  patientia,  not 
poenitentia. 

*  Poenitentia. 

3  Ezek.  3,  20,  cf.  33,  13;  the  exposition  of  Gregory  is  I.  super  Ezech.  homil. 
II.  n.  21;  C.  Si  averterit  (15.)  and  C.  Hoc  nobis  (16.),  ibid.  d.  4. 


I 
I 


6 


}' 


■X 


ft 


V 


DISTINCTION  XV 


169 


quoted  below.  For  Augustine  says^ :  "There  are  many  who  repent 
of  their  sin,  but  still  reserve  for  themselves  some  sins  in  which  they 
delight;  not  understanding  that  the  Lord  freed  the  dumb  and  deaf 
man  once  for  all  from  his  demon,  teaching  by  this  that  we  are  never 
healed,  unless  of  everything.  For  if  he  wished  sins  to  be  retained  in 
part  by  the  woman  who  had  seven  devils,  he  could  have  benefited 
him  by  casting  out  six  and  letting  one  remain.  But  he  expelled  seven, 
so  as  to  teach  that  all  offences  should  be  cast  out  at  once.  Indeed 
when  he  cast  out  a  legion  of  demons  from  another,  he  left  not 
one  of  them  all,  to  possess  the  freed  man  showing  that  even  if 
our  sins  are  a  thousand,  it  is  necessary  to  repent  of  them  all. 
The  Lord  never  healed  anyone,  whom  he  did  not  release  wholly. 
For  he  healed  the  whole  man  on  the  Sabbath,  because  he  freed 
both  the  body  from  all  infirmity  and  the  soul  from  all  contagion; 
indicating  that  the  penitent  ought  to  grieve  for  all  his  sins  at 
once.  For  I  know  that  the  Lord  is  an  enemy  to  every  wicked 
man.  How  therefore  shall  a  man  who  reserves  one  sin,  receive 
pardon  for  another?  Without  the  love  of  God  he  would  get 
pardon,  but  without  it  no  one  ever  finds  grace.  For  he  is  an  enemy 
of  God,  while  he  perseveres  in  oflfending.  For  it  is  a  sort  of  impiety 
and  infidelity,  to  expect  a  half  pardon  from  him  who  is  just  and 
justice  itself;  since  then  he  would  find  grace  without  true  penance. 
For  true  penance  tends  to  lead  the  man  who  confesses  to  the  purity 
of  baptism.  Since,  if  he  is  rightly  penitent,  any  uncleanness  he  has 
contracted  after  the  purification  of  baptism  he  must  wash  away  at 
least  with  the  tears  of  his  mind ;  but  he  is  hard  enough  whose  eyes  do 
not  declare  the  grief  of  his  heart.  But  let  him  know  himself  culp- 
ably hard,  who  weeps  over  the  injuries  of  time,  or  the  death  of  a 
friend,  and  does  not  show  his  grief  for  sin  in  tears.  Who  therefore 
repents,  let  him.  repent  wholly."  The  same2 :  "Penitents,  if  truly  you 
are  penitents,  and  not  mockers,  change  your  life,  be  reconciled  to 
God !  You  do  penance,  you  bow  your  knees,  and  laugh :  you  mock 
the  patience  of  God.  If  you  do  penance,  repent;  if  you  do  not 
repent  you  are  not  penitent.    If  then  you  repent,  why  do  you  do  the 


*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  (among  Augustine's  works),  c.  9.  n.  24;  C. 
Sunt  plures  (42.),  de  Poenitentia  d.  3.  §1.  See  Mark  7,  32;  Lk.  8,  30;  Mark  5,  9; 
John  7,  23. 

*Sermo  393.  (alias  41  in  the  50  Homil.)  n.  i;  C.  Poenitentes  (10.),  ibid. 


I/O 


APPENDIX 


things  you  have  wrongly  done?  If  you  repent  of  having  done  them, 
refuse  to  do  them;  if  you  still  do  them,  certainly  you  are  not  peni- 
tent." Also  Innocent  IP  :  "We  admonish  our  brothers,  lest  they 
suffer  the  souls  of  the  laity  to  be  deceived  by  false  penances,  and  to 
be  dragged  into  hell.  And  it  is  known  to  be  false  penance,  when 
many  sins  are  overlooked  and  penance  is  done  for  one  alone ;  or  when 
penance  is  done  for  one,  and  another  is  not  abandoned." 

From  the  foregoing  is  gained  a  clear  knowledge  of  true  penance 
or  satisfaction.  For  this  is  true  penance  which  abolishes  sin;  and 
this  alone  does  it,  which  corrects  the  wrong;  and  this  corrects  the 
wrong  which  causes  hatred  of  the  offence  committed  and  of  com- 
mitting it,  together  with  desire  to  make  satisfaction.  For  Judas  is 
said  to  have  done  penance,  without  gaining  pardon,  because  by  such 
penance  he  did  not  correct  the  offence.  Wherefore  Jerome^ :  "His 
late  penance  did  not  profit  Judas  anything  for  by  it  he  could  not 
correct  the  crime  as  when  a  brother  sins  against  a  brother,  so  that  he 
can  amend  his  sin,  it  can  be  forgiven  him;  but  if  his  work  remains, 
penance  is  expressed  by  word  in  vain ;  this  it  is  which  is  said  of  that 
most  unhappy  man :  And  may  his  prayer  be  turned  into  sin' ;  so  that 
not  only  was  he  unable  to  amend  the  sin  of  treachery,  but  he  added 
the  crime  of  slaying  himself." — Take  care  how  you  understand  this 
phrase:  "That  he  can  amend  his  sin,"  etc.  For  amendment  is  not 
to  be  understood  here  as  a  recompense  for  something  taken,  but  as 
remorse  and  abomination  for  sin,  with  desire  of  satisfaction.  For  if 
a  man  takes  away  unjustly  from  another  what  he  cannot  restore,  as 
an  eye,  or  life  or  the  like,  and  yet  if  he  does  penance  for  the  sin,  with 
longing  for  worthy  satisfaction,  he  has  pardon.  Nor  should  anyone 
therefore  think  that  he  who  has  unjustly  taken  away  another's  goods 
which  he  can  return,  does  penance  for  his  sin  and  obtains  pardon, 
unless  he  restores  what  he  took  away.  "For  as  long  as  the  object 
for  whose  sake  the  sin  was  committed  is  not  returned,  if  it  can  be 
returned,  penance  is  not  done,  but  feigned."  ^ 


*  Can.  Fratres  nostros  (8.),  de  Poenitentia  d.  5. 

2  Lib.  IV.  Comment,  in  Matt.  (27,  5.);  C.  Nihil  Judae  (38.),  de  Poenitentia 
d.  3.    See  Ps.  108,  7. 

•  August.,  Ep.  153.  (alias  54.)  ad  Macedonium,  c.  6.  n.  20;  C.  Si  res  aliena 
I   ),  C.  14.  q.  6. 


^ 
/ 


Distinction  XVI 


PART    I 


I.     Of  the  three  things  which  must  he  considered  in  penance,  that  is, 
compunction,  confession,  satisfaction. 

Moreover  in  the  perfection  of  penance  three  steps  are  to  be 
observed,  that  is  compunction  of  the  heart,  confession  of  the  mouth, 
satisfaction  in  deed.  Wherefore  John  the  golden-mouthed* :  "Per- 
fect penance  compels  the  sinner  to  bear  all  things  cheerfully ;  in  his 
heart  contrition,  in  his  mouth,  confession,  in  deed  all  humility.  This 
is  fruitful  penance;  that  just  as  we  offend  God  in  three  ways,  that 
is,  with  the  heart,  the  mouth,  and  the  deed,  so  in  three  ways  we 
make  satisfaction."  For  there  are  three  different  sins,  as  Augustine 
says,2  "of  the  heart,  and  of  deed,  and  of  habit  or  word,  as  it  were 
three  deaths:  one  as  if  in  the  home;  that  is,  when  there  is  consent  to 
lust  in  the  heart;  another  as  if  carried  next  outside  the  door,  when 
assent  proceeds  to  deed ;  the  third  when  the  soul  is  oppressed  by  force 
of  evil  habit  as  by  a  weight,  or  armed  with  the  shield  of  guilty 
defence,  as  if  already  decaying  in  the  grave.  These  are  the  three 
kinds  of  dead  men  whom  the  Lord  is  said  to  have  raised."  To  this 
triple  death  is  supplied  a  triple  remedy :  contrition,  confession,  satis- 
faction. Compunction  is  commended  to  us  here^:  "Rend  your 
hearts,  and  not  your  garments,"  confession  here :  "The  just  man  is 
first  accuser  of  himself" ;  for  truly  he  confesses  who  accuses  himself, 
who  imputes  evil  to  himself  by  execration.  And  here:  "Pour  out 
your  hearts  in  his  presence."  And  again:  "Confess  your  sins  one 
to  another.'* 

II.     What  true  satisfaction  is. 

Satisfaction  is  commanded  by  John^,  where  he  says,  "Bring 

»  C'Chrysostom.")    Can.  Perfecta  poenitentia  (8.),  de  Poenitentia  dist.  3. 

2  Lib.  I.  de  Serm.  Domini  in  monte,  c.  12.  n.  37,  and  C.  Sicut  tribus  (21.), 
ibid.  dist.  2.    See  Matt.  9,  25;  Luke  7,  14;  John  11,  43. 

3  Joel  2,  13;  following  passage  is  Prov.  18,  17;  third,  Ps.  61,  9;  fourth,  James 
5,  16. 

*  Matt.  3,  8;  Luke  3,  8.— -Following  passage  is  in  the  Glossa  on  this  passage, 
cf.  Gregory,  I.  Homil.  in  Evang.,  homil.  20.  n.  8. 

171 


172 


APPENDIX 


y 


DISTINCTION  XVI 


173 


forth  fruits  worthy  of  penance,"  that  is,  that  according  to  the  quality 
and  quantity  of  the  guilt  should  be  the  quality  and  quantity  of  the 
punishment.  "For  the  fruit  of  good  work  ought  not  be  the  same 
for  him  who  has  sinned  not  at  all,  or  to  a  slight  degree,  and  for  him 
who  has  fallen  grievously." — Therefore  discretion  for  the  penitent 
is  very  necessary,  that  he  may  do  what  Augustine  teaches,  saying^ : 
*'Let  a  man  consider  the  quality  of  his  offence,  in  place,  in  time,  in 
persistence,  or  in  change  of  the  person,  and  under  how  much  temp- 
tation he  has  done  it,  and  how  repeatedly  he  has  committed  the  sin 
itself.  For  it  is  necessary  that  a  fornicator  repent  according  to  the 
excellence  of  his  position  or  of  his  office,  and  according  to  the  kind 
of  prostitute,  and  according  to  the  manner  of  his  deed ;  and  the  way 
in  which  he  committed  his  baseness :  whether  in  a  sacred  place,  or  in 
a  time  appointed  for  prayer,  as  there  are  festivities  and  times  of  fast- 
ing. Let  him  consider  how  long  he  has  persisted,  and  let  him  weep 
because  he  has  sinned  persistently,  and  let  him  remember  by  how 
strong  an  attack  he  was  conquered — for  there  are  those  who  not 
only  are  not  conquered,  but  of  their  own  accord  offer  themselves  to 
sin  nor  do  they  await  temptation,  but  go  to  seek  the  pleasure. — ^And 
let  him  ponder  within  himself  how  he  sinned  with  delight  in  the 
repeated  doing  of  sin.  All  these  various  things  are  to  be  confessed 
and  wept  over,  so  that  when  the  man  has  recognized  what  his  sin  is, 
he  may  soon  find  God  propitious  to  him.  In  estimating  the  enormity 
of  his  sin,  let  him  consider  of  what  age  he  was,  of  what  wisdom  and 
rank.  Let  him  dwell  upon  these  details,  and  let  him  realize  the  nature 
of  his  offence,  purging  away  with  his  tears  the  whole  (luality  of  his 
wrong-doing;  let  him  weep  over  the  virtue  which  in  the  meanwhile 
he  has  lacked.  For  he  must  grieve  not  only  that  he  has  sinned,  but 
that  he  has  deprived  himself  of  virtue.  Let  him  weep  also  since 
"offending  in  one,  he  is  made  guilty  of  all."  ^  For  he  has  shown  him- 
self unthankful,  who  full  of  virtue  has  not  honored  God  at  all.  For 
a  man  becomes  the  more  guilty  sinner  in  just  so  far  as  he  is  the 
more  acceptable  to  God;  for  this  reason  Adam  sinned  the  more 
because  he  abounded  in  every  good  thing.     In  another   way  the 


*  (Among  his  works)  de  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  c.  14.  n.  29;  C.  Considered 
(i.),  ibid.  d.  5. 

*  James  2,  10.    Following  passage  from  Lib.  de  Vera  et  falsa  Poen.  c.  15. 
n.  30.  31,  and  can.  cit. 


./' 


•\^ 


offender  in  one  point  becomes  guilty  of  all,  because  every  virtue 
suffers  detriment  from  one  offence.  "Let  him  put  himself  wholly 
in  the  judgment  and  power  of  the  priest,  reserving  nothing  of  his 
own  to  himself,  so  that  he  may  be  ready  to  do  everything  at  the 
priest's  order  to  secure  the  life  of  the  soul,  which  he  would  do  ta 
shun  the  death  of  the  body ;  and  this  with  desire,  because  he  is  regain- 
ing eternal  life.  For  he  who  will  be  immortal  ought  to  do  with  hap- 
piness what  one  on  the  point  of  death  would  do  to  postpone  death: 
always  let  him  pray  to  God,  let  him  offer  God  his  mind  and  the  con- 
trition of  his  heart,  and  next  let  him  give  what  he  is  able  of  his. 
possessions ;  and  then  whatever  he  offers,  he  oft'ers  it  without  fear.. 
•The  Lord  had  respect  to  Abel,  and  to  his  gifts'  ^ ;  it  says  'to  Abel*" 
before  'to  his  gifts.'  Therefore  with  judgment  of  the  heart  are  the 
alms  of  the  giver  to  be  weighed ;  nor  should  we  consider  how  much,, 
but  with  what  intention,  with  what  affection  he  gives  what  he  is  able.. 
He  therefore  who  wishes  to  redeem  his  sins  by  an  oblation  of  tem- 
poral goods,  let  him  first  offer  his  heart.  Let  him  take  care  also  lest 
he  be  led  by  a  natural  feeling  of  shame,  and  divide  up  his  confes- 
sion in  his  own  mind,  so  that  he  chooses  to  reveal  different  things  to 
different  priests.  For  some  conceal  from  one  priest  what  they  keep 
to  reveal  to  another ;  but  this  is  to  praise  themselves,  and  to  tend  to 
hypocrisy  and  always  to  be  in  want  of  the  pardon,  to  which  they 
think  they  may  attain  by  bits.  Let  him  beware  also  lest  he  come  to 
the  Lord's  body  before  he  is  comforted  with  a  good  conscience ;  and 
let  him  grieve,  because  he  does  not  yet  dare  to  receive  the  food  of 
salvation,  which  he  much  desires.  Also  let  him  abstain  from  games,, 
from  the  spectacles  of  the  world,  who  wishes  to  attain  the  perfect 
grace  of  remission.  These  are  worthy  fruits  of  penance,  unbinding 
the  captive  soul,  and  preserving  it  in  liberty."  And  further^ :  "Let 
the  soul  seek  worthy  fruits,  even  if  not  worthy  of  penance.  For 
there  are  worthy  fruits  of  virtues  which  do  not  suffice  for  penitents. 
For  penance  demands  harder  ones,  that  with  grief  and  groans,  it  may 
obtain  life  for  the  dead." — From  these  passages  we  are  shown  what 
are  the  fruits  worthy  of  penance,  by  which  true  satisfaction  is  pro- 
cured, also  that  not  all  worthy  fruits  are  fruits  worthy  of  penance ; 
which  last  is  to  be  understood  of  that  penance,  which  belongs  ta 


^  Gen.  4,  4. 
2  Loc.  cit. 


174 


APPENDIX 


greater  oflFences.    For  what  suffices  for  men  who  sin  not  at  all  or 
little,  does  not  suffice  for  the  grievously  delinquent. 

III.  What  false  satisfaction  is. 

And  just  as  there  are  fruits  worthy  of  penance,  and  true  satis- 
faction, so  also  there  are  unworthy  fruits,  and  false  satisfaction,  that 
is,  false  penance.  Wherefore  Gregory^ :  "We  speak  of  false  pen- 
ances, which  are  not  imposed  according  to  the  instructions  of  the 
saints  in  keeping  with  the  quality  of  the  oflFences.  Therefore  a  sol- 
dier, or  a  money-lender,  or  a  man  assigned  to  some  office,  which  he 
cannot  fill  without  sin,  if  snared  in  grievous  faults  he  comes  to  pen- 
ance, or  a  man  who  holds  the  goods  of  another  unjustly,  or  who  bears 
hate  in  his  heart,  let  him  recognize  that  he  cannot  accomplish  true 
penance,  unless  he  relinquishes  his  business,  or  abandons  his  office, 
and  drives  hate  out  of  his  heart,  and  restores  the  goods  which  he  has 
unjustly  taken  away.  Yet  let  him  not  despair ;  in  the  meanwhile  we 
urge  him  to  do  anything  good  he  can  do,  so  that  God  may  illuminate 
his  heart  unto  penance."  Whereas  there  is  inner  and  outer  penance, 
it  appears  sufficiently  from  what  has  already  been  said,  what  is  true 
and  what  is  false  for  both  of  them. 

PART    II 

IV.  Of  the  three  acts  of  penance. 

But  to  the  foregoing  we  must  add  that  penance  is  done  in  three 
ways :  namely,  before  baptism,  for  previous  sins ;  after  baptism,  for 
more  grievous  sins  which  are  committed  later;  also  there  is  daily 
penance  for  venial  sins,  which  is  the  practice  of  humble  men  and 
perfect.  Wherefore  Augustine^ :  "There  are  three  acts  of  penance, 
which  your  learning  recognizes  with  me.  There  is  one  which  pro- 
duces a  new  man,  when  all  previous  sins  are  washed  away  by  bap- 
tism ;  because  no  one  who  is  master  of  his  own  will  can  begin  a  new 
life,  unless  he  repents  of  his  old  life ;  from  which  rule  children  are 


1  Gregor.  VII.,  Concil.  Rom.  V.  n.  5;  c.  Falsas  poenitentias  (6.),    ibid.  d.  5. 

*  Sermo  351.  (alias  50.  inter  50  Homil.)  c.  2.  n.  2;  C.  Tres  sunt  (81.),  ibid. 
d.  I.  Following  passage,  ibid.  c.  4.  n.  7,  and  in  the  same  canon;  third,  August., 
Ep.  265.  (alias  108.),  ad  Seleucianum,  n.  7;  C.  Agunt  homines  (97.),  de  Consecrat. 
d.  4.     (See  Acts  2.  38.) 


/ 


%"* 


H' 


DISTINCTION  XVI 


^7S 


except  when  they  are  baptized,  because  they  are  not  yet  able  to  use 
free  will,  and  for  them  the  faith  of  those  by  whom  they  are  oflFered 
is  of  value  to  the  remission  of  original  sin."  "Another  act  of  pen- 
ance is  after  baptism,  and  is  performed  for  those  sins,  which  the 
decalogue  pf  the  Law  enumerates.  Therefore  men  do  penance  before 
baptism,  for  earlier  sins,  so  that  they  may  also  be  baptized,  as  Peter 
says :  *Do  penance,'  and  'let  everyone  of  you  be  baptized  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord,'  etc.  They  also  do  penance,  if  after  baptism  they  have 
so  sinned,  that  they  deserve  to  be  excommunicated  and  afterwards 
reconciled."  "There  is  also  the  penance  which  is  the  daily  penalty 
of  good  and  humble  believers  in  which  we  beat  our  breasts,  saying: 
Torgive  us  our  debts,'  etc.  Nor  do  we  wish  the  debts  forgiven  us 
which  we  believe  were  forgiven  us  in  baptism."  ^ 

V.  Of  a  multitude  of  venial  sins,  which  oppress  us  like  one  great  sin. 

"But  those  sins  which  creep  on  human  frailty,  small  indeed,  yet 
numerous,  which  if  they  were  collected  against  us,  would  grieve  and 
oppress  us  like  some  one  great  sin.  For  what  diflFerence  does  it  make 
in  a  shipwreck  whether  the  ship  is  swamped  and  overwhelmed  by 
one  great  wave,  or  whether  little  by  little  the  water  steals  into  the 
hold  through  the  fault  of  negligent  seamen  and  fills  the  ship  and 
it  is  sunk?  Therefore  let  fasting  and  almsgiving  and  prayers  keep 
watch  for  us,  in  which  when  we  say :  'Forgive  us  our  debts,'  etc.,  we 
show  that  we  have  what  is  to  be  forgiven  us;  and  let  us  humiliate 
our  souls  by  these  words,  and  not  cease  to  do  penance  daily." 

VI.  Of  the  satisfaction  for  venial  sins. 

What  moreover  is  sufficient  satisfaction  for  venial  sins,  Augus- 
tine indicates,  saying  in  the  Enchiridion^ :  "For  daily  and  brief  and 
trivial  sins,  without  which  we  do  not  live,  the  daily  prayer  of  the 
faithful  makes  satisfaction.  For  it  is  theirs  to  say :  'Our  Father  who 
art  in  heaven,'  etc.  This  prayer  wholly  wipes  out  small  and  daily 
sins;  and  it  eflFaces  those  faults,  by  which  the  life  of  the  faithful  is 
made  wicked,  so  by  doing  penance  it  becomes  transformed  into  a 
better.    Thus  we  truly  say :  'Forgive  us  our  debts,'  so  also  may  we 


*  Ibid.  n.  8;  C.  Tres  sunt,  supra  cit.,  which  extends  into  the  following  chapter, 
the  proposition  being  interrupted  by  the  chapter  divisions. 
2  Cap.  71.  n.  19;  C.  De  quotidianis  (20.),  de  Poen. 


176 


APPENDIX 


li 


truly  say :  'as  also  we  forgive  our  debtors/  that  is,  be  it  done,  as  we 
have  said ;  because  almsgiving  itself  for  those  who  seek  pardon  is  to 
forgive  wholly." — From  these  and  other  passages  quoted  it  is  now 
easy  to  understand  what  satisfaction  is  to  be  made  for  venial  sins. 
For  the  Lord's  prayer  with  fasting  and  alms  suffices,  on  condition 
however  that  some  little  contrition  precedes  and  that  confession  be 
made  also  if  opportunity  offer;  of  this  confession  we  shall  treat 
later.^  But  for  more  grievous  sins  these  means  are  also  to  be  used 
in  making  satisfaction,  but  much  more  vehemently  and  strictly,  be- 
cause, as  Augustine  says,^  to  do  penance  "it  is  not  sufficient  to  change 
the  character  into  a  better,  and  to  depart  from  evils  done,  unless  for 
the  wrongs  which  have  been  done,  the  man  satisfies  the  Lord  by  the 
grief  of  penance,  the  groan  of  humility,  the  sacrifice  of  a  contrite 
heart,  with  the  aid  of  alms." 


> 


» Dist.  XVIL 

2  Sermo.  351  (alias  50  inter  50  homil.)  c.  5.  n.  12. 


<ii 


I 


Distinction  XVII 


PART   I 


I.     Whether  sins  are  forgiven  without  confession. 

Here  arises  a  question  that  has  many  parts.  For  first  we  are 
asked  whether  without  satisfaction  and  confession  of  the  mouth,  by 
contrition  of  the  heart  only,  sin  may  be  forgiven  anyone.  Secondly,, 
whether  it  suffices  for  anyone  to  confess  to  God  without  a  priest. 
Thirdly,  whether  confession  made  to  a  faithful  layman  would  be 
valid. — On  these  points  even  the  learned  are  found  to  think  differ- 
ently, because  the  doctors  seem  to  have  taught  varied  and  almost 
contradictory  views  about  them.  For  some  say,  that  without  con- 
fession of  the  mouth  and  satisfaction  of  deed  no  one  is  cleansed  from 
sin-  if  he  has  time  for  doing  these  things. — But  others  say,  that  before 
confession  of  the  mouth  and  satisfaction  through  the  contrition  of 
the  heart  sin  is  forgiven  by  God,  if  however  the  sinner  has  the  desire 
to  confess.  Wherefore  the  Prophet^ :  "I  have  said,  I  will  confess 
against  myself  my  injustice  to  the  Lord,  and  thou  hast  remitted," 
etc.  Which  Cassiodorus2  explains  saying:  "  'I  have  said,'  that  is,  I 
have  determined  within  myself,  that  *I  would  confess,  and  thou 
hast  remitted  it.'  Great  pity  of  God,  who  hast  remitted  the  sin  for 
the  mere  promise !  For  the  promise  is  accepted  for  the  deed."  Also 
Augustine^ :  "Not  yet  does  he  make  it  known,  but  he  promises  that 
he  will  make  it  known ;  and  the  Lord  remits  it,  because  to  say  just 
this  is  to  make  something  known  in  the  heart.  Not  yet  is  the  voice 
in  the  mouth,  so  that  a  man  may  hear  the  confession,  and  God  hears." 
Also:  "The  sacrifice  of  God  is  a  troubled  spirit,  a  contrite  heart,"  etc. 
Elsewhere  also  we  read:  "At  whatever  hour  a  sinner  turns  and 
laments,  he  shall  live  in  life  and  shall  not  die";  it  does  not  say:  he 
confesses  with  his  mouth,  but  "turns,  laments."    "Wherefore  we  are 


*  Ps.  31,  5.— On  these  two  opinions,  cf.  Hugh,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  14,  c.  8,  and 
Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  11 ;  also  Gratian,  Introductio  de  Poenit.  d.  i. 
*Ps.  31,  7. 

» In  Ps.  31.  enarrat.  2.  n.  15,  and  C.  Magna  pietas  (5.),  de  Poenit.  d.  i.— 
See  Ps.  50,  19,  and  Ezek.  18,  17. 

177 


178 


APPENDIX 


y 


DISTINCTION  XVII 


179 


i| 


I 

i 


given  to  understand,  that  even  though  the  mouth  be  silent,  we  may 
sometimes  obtain  pardon.  Hence  those  lepers  also  whom  the  Lord 
commanded  to  show  themselves  to  the  priests,  were  cleansed  on  the 
way,  before  they  reached  the  priests.  By  this  it  is  indicated  that 
before  we  open  our  mouths  to  the  priests,  that  is  confess  our  sins,  we 
are  cleansed  from  the  leprosy  of  sin.  Lazarus  also  was  not  first 
led  out  of  the  tomb  and  afterward  awakened  by  the  Lord,  but  was 
awakened  within  and  came  forth  alive;  that  the  awakening  of  the 
spirit  might  be  shown  to  precede  confession.  For  no  one  can  confess, 
unless  aroused,  because  confession  by  one  dead,  as  by  one  who  is 
not,  does  not  exist:  therefore  no  one  confesses,  unless  aroused.  But 
no  one  is  aroused,  except  he  who  is  absolved  from  sin ;  because  sin 
is  the  death  of  the  soul,  and  as  the  soul  is  the  Hfe  of  the  body,  so 
its  own  life  is  God."  ^ — From  these  and  many  other  authorities  it  is 
proved  that  before  confession  or  satisfaction  sin  is  forgiven  upon 
contrition  alone ;  and  those  who  deny  it,  find  it  hard  to  explain  these 
authorities;  and  they  introduce  the  testimony  of  other  authors  for 
the  overthrow  of  this  opinion  and  the  support  of  their  own.  For  the 
Lord  says  through  Isaiah^ :  "Tell  thou  thy  iniquities  that  thou  maye^t 
be  justified."  Also  Ambrose^:  "No  man  can  be  justified  from  sin 
unless  he  has  first  confessed  the  sin  itself."  He  also  says* :  "Con- 
fession frees  the  soul  from  death,  confession  opens  paradise,  con- 
fession gives  the  hope  of  salvation,  because  he  does  not  deserve  to 
be  justified  who  is  not  willing  to  confess  his  sin  in  his  life-time. 
Confession  frees  us,  which  is  done  with  penance.  But  penance  is  the 
grief  of  the  heart  and  the  bitterness  of  the  soul  for  the  evils  which 
each  one  has  committed."  Also  John^:  "No  man  can  receive  the 
grace  of  God  unless  he  has  been  purified  of  all  sin  by  the  confession 
of  penance  and  by  baptism."  Also  Augustine^ :  "Do  penance,  as  it 
is  done  in  the  Church.  Let  no  one  say  to  himself :  I  do  it  secretly, 
because  I  do  it  before  God;  God  knows,  who  has  pardoned  me, 


^  Gratian,  C,  Convertimini  ad  me  (34.),  ibid.;  see  Luke  17,  14;  John  11,  44; 
Ecclus.  17,  26. — On  the  Ufe  of  the  soul,  cf.  Augustine,  in  Ps.  70.  enarrat.  2.  n.  3. 
'  Is.  43,  26. 
'  De  Paradiso,  c.  14.  n.  71 ;  C.  Non  potest  (38.),  ibid. 

*  Serm.  25.  de  s.  Quadragesima,  n.  i ;  C.  Ecce  nunc  tempus  (39.),  ibid. 

*  (Chromatius?)    C.  Non  potest  quis  (41.),  ibid. 

*  Serm.  392.  (alias  homil.  49.  inter  Homil.  50)  c.  3.  n.  3;  C.  Agile  poenitentiam 
(44.),  ibid.    See  Matt.  18,  18;  John  20,  23;  Job  31,  33. 


^- 


\ 


"because  I  do  it  in  my  heart.  Then  without  cause  was  it  said :  'What 
thou  loosest  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven'?  Then  without 
cause  *were  the  keys  given'  ?  Then  we  make  vain  the  w^ord  of  Christ. 
Job  says:  *If  I  have  blushed  to  confess  my  sins  in  the  sight  of  the 
people' !"  Also  Ambrose^ :  "The  guilt  is  venial,  which  is  followed 
by  confession  of  sins."  Also  Augustine^  on  this  passage  of  the 
psalm :  "Let  not  the  deep  swallow  me  up,  and  let  not  the  pit  shut  her 
mouth  upon  me,"  says :  "The  pit  is  the  depth  of  iniquity  into  which 
if  thou  hast  fallen,  its  mouth  shall  not  close  upon  thee,  if  thou  dost 
not  close  thy  mouth.  Confess  therefore  and  say :  'Out  of  the  depths 
have  I  cried  unto  thee,  oh  Lord,'  etc.,  and  thou  shalt  escape.  It  closes 
upon  him,  who  has  despised  it  in  the  depth,  from  whom  in  death,  just 
as  from  one  who  is  not,  there  can  be  no  confession."  Also^ :  "No 
one  receives  pardon  for  a  more  grievous  debt  of  penalty,  unless  he 
has  paid  some  kind  of  penalty,  even  if  much  less  than  he  owes.  For 
so  the  liberality  of  mercy  is  granted  us  by  God,  that  the  justice  of 
discipline  be  not  neglected."  Also  Jerome^  :  "Let  him  who  is  a 
sinner,  lament  his  own  sins  or  those  of  the  people,  and  let  him  enter 
the  church,  from  which  he  had  wandered  on  account  of  sin,  and  let 
him  sleep  in  sackcloth,  that  he  may  compensate  by  austerity  of  life 
for  the  earlier  pleasures  by  which  he  oflfended  God." — By  these  and 
other  authorities  they  endeavor  to  prove  that  without  oral  confession 
and  some  payment  of  penalty,  no  one  can  be  cleansed  from  sin. 

What  therefore  is  to  be  thought  about  these  things?  What  be- 
lieved ?  It  can  certainly  be  said  that  without  confession  of  the  mouth 
and  payment  of  the  outward  penalty  sins  are  eflPaced  by  contrition  and 
humility  of  heart.  For  from  the  moment  anyone  proposes  to  confess, 
being  pricked  in  conscience,  God  forgives ;  because  there  is  there  the 
confession  of  the  heart,  though  not  of  the  mouth,  by  which  the  soul 
is  cleansed  within  from  the  stain  and  contagion  of  committed  sin, 
and  the  debt  of  eternal  death  is  relaxed.  Therefore  that  which  was 
said  above  regarding  confession  and  penance,  should  be  referred 


*  Lib.  de  Paradiso,  c.  14.  n.  71 ;  C.  Serpens  (47.),  ibid. 

2  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  68,  16.  serm.  i.  n.  19;  Gratian,  C.  Voluissent  iniqui  (60.), 
ibid.  §3.    See  Ps.  129,  i ;  Prov.  18,  3;  Ecclus.  17,  26. 

»  De  Continentia,  c.  6.  n.  15;  C.  Nullus  debitae  (42.),  ibid. 

*  Comment,  in  loel.  i,  13;  C.  Qui  sanctus  (66.),  ibid.    For  the  last  proposi- 
tion and  following  cf.  Gratian,  C.  Quis  aliquando  (87.),  ibid.  §14. 


\    ' 


i8o 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XVII 


i8i 


I 


either  to  the  confession  of  the  heart,  or  to  inward  punishment — just 
as  this  saying  of  Augustine,  "that  no  one  obtains  pardon,  unless  first 
he  has  paid  some  small  penalty  for  his  sin" — must  be  understood  of 
the  external  penalty,  and  applied  to  the  scornful  or  negligent,  just 
as  this :  **Let  no  one  say,  I  do  it  secretly,"  etc.  For  some  neglect  to 
confess  sins  in  their  lifetime  or  are  ashamed  to  do  it,  and  therefore 
do  not  deserve  to  be  justified.  For  just  as  inward  penance  is  enjoined 
upon  us,  so  also  confession  of  the  mouth,  and  outward  satisfaction, 
if  we  have  the  opportunity.  Wherefore  he  is  not  truly  penitent  who 
does  not  have  the  desire  to  confess.  And  just  as  remission  of  sin  is 
the  gift  of  God,  so  penance  and  confession  by  which  sin  is  wiped 
out,  cannot  take  place  save  from  God,  as  Augustine  says^ :  "Now,  he 
says,  he  has  the  gift  of  the  holy  Spirit,  who  confesses  and  repents, 
because  there  cannot  be  confession  of  sin  and  compunction  in  man 
of  himself.  For  when  anyone  is  angry  at  himself  and  dissatisfied 
with  himself,  it  is  not  without  the  gift  of  the  holy  Spirit."  Therefore 
a  penitent  ought  to  confess  his  sins,  if  he  have  time;  and  yet  before 
confession  of  the  mouth,  if  there  is  the  promise  in  the  heart,  forgive- 
ness is  extended  to  him. 

PART  II 

11.     Whether  it  suffices  to  confess  to  God  alone. 

Now  let  us  look  into  the  second  division  of  the  question,  that 
is,  whether  it  suffices  to  confess  sins  to  God  alone,  or  whether  it  is 
necessary  to  confess  to  a  priest. — To  some  it  seems  to  suffice,  if  con- 
fession is  made  to  God  alone  without  the  judgment  of  the  priest  and 
confession  of  the  Church,  because  David  said^ :  "I  said,  I  will  confess 
to  the  Lord,  and  thou  hast  remitted,"  etc. ;  he  does  not  say  ''to  the 
priest,"  and  yet  he  says  the  sin  is  forgiven  him.  Also  Ambrose*^: 
"Peter  wept,  because  his  guilt  had  come  suddenly  upon  him;  I  do 
not  find  what  he  said,  I  find  that  he  wept.  I  read  of  his  tears,  I  do  not 
read  of  his  satisfaction.  But  what  cannot  be  defended,  can  be 
washed  away.  Tears  wash  away  a  sin,  which  one  is  ashamed  to 
confess  with  the  voice.    Weeping  brings  about  both  pardon  and  a 


*  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  50.  n.  16. 

•Ps.  31,  5. 

'  X.  Exposit.  Evang.  sec.  Lucam,  n.  88;  C.  Petrus  doluit  (1.),  ibid.  d.  i. 


N' 


t- 


>*- 


<i 


^^ 


f 


natural  feeling  of  shame."  Bishop  Maximus^  says  the  same  also; 
likewise  John  Chrysostom^:  "I  do  not  say  to  you  that  you  should 
betray  yourself  in  public,  nor  accuse  yourself  among  others,  but  I 
wish  that  you  would  obey  the  Prophet  when  he  says :  'Reveal  thy  life 
to  God.'  Before  God  therefore  confess  your  sins,  before  a  true  judge 
with  prayer,  declare  your  guilt  not  with  your  tongue  but  in  the  mem- 
ory of  your  conscience;  and  then  at  last  hope  that  you  may  obtain 
pity.  If  you  have  your  sins  continually  in  mind,  you  will  never 
harbor  evil  against  your  neighbor  in  your  heart."  Also^ :  "Tell  your 
sins,  that  you  may  eflface  them.  But  if  you  are  ashamed  to  tell  them 
to  anyone,  tell  them  daily  in  your  spirit ;  I  do  not  say,  that  you  should 
confess  to  your  fellow-servant,  so  that  he  might  reproach  you;  tell 
them  to  God,  who  cures  them.  For  even  if  you  do  not  tell  them  to 
him,  he  is  not  ignorant  of  them:  when  you  did  them,  he  was  pres- 
ent; when  you  committed  them,  he  knew.  Then  why  does  he  wish 
to  learn  them  from  you?  You  have  not  blushed  to  sin,  and  do  you 
blush  to  confess?  Tell  them  in  this  Hfe,  that  in  another  you  may 
have  rest;  tell  them  with  groaning  and  weeping.  Your  sins  are 
written  in  the  book.  Let  the  sponges  of  your  sins  be  your  tears." 
Likewise  Prosper* :  "If  those,  whose  sins  are  concealed  from  human 
notice,  not  confessed  by  themselves,  nor  published  by  others,  refuse 
to  confess  or  amend  them,  they  will  have  as  avenger  the  God  whom 
they  have  as  witness.  But  if  they  become  judges  of  themselves,  and 
as  it  were  avengers  of  their  own  iniquity,  let  them  inflict  on  them- 
selves a  voluntary  penalty  of  the  severest  punishment;  they  will 
exchange  eternal  punishment  for  temporal  penalties  and  with  tears 
flowing  from  true  contrition  of  heart  they  shall  extinguish  the  burn- 
ings of  eternal  fire."  And  below^ :  "They  will  more  easily  reconcile 
God  to  themselves,  who  either  by  their  own  confessions  make  known 
their  offence  or  if  others  are  ignorant,  pronounce  against  themselves 
a  sentence  of  voluntary  excommunication  and  separated,  not  in  spirit 
but  in  office,  from  the  altar  to  which  they  have  ministered,  they 
mourn  their  life  as  dead ;  certain  that  being  reconciled  to  themselves 


1  Homil.  53. 

'  Homil.  31.  in  Epist.  ad  Hebr.  n.  3;  cf.  Gratian,  C.  Quis  aliquando  (87.), 
ibid.  §1.     See  Ps.  36,  5. 

3  Homil.  2.  in  Ps.  50.  n.  5.  (among  his  spurious  works.) 

*  Lib.  II.  de  Vita  contemplat.  c.  7.  n.  2;  C.  Porro  tilt  (31.),  ibid. 

*  Ibid.  n.  3;  C.  Facilius  (32.),  ibid. 


APPENDIX 

by  the  efficacious  fruits  of  penance,  they  will  receive  from  God  not 
only  what  they  have  lost,  but  also  the  joys  of  the  heavenly  city." — On 
these  authorities  do  they  depend  who  maintain  that  it  suffices  to- 
con  f  ess  one's  sins  to  God  without  a  priest.  For  they  say  that  if  any- 
one fears  to  disclose  his  guilt  among  men,  lest  he  be  held  in  oppro- 
brium therefor,  or  lest  others  might  resort  to  sin  by  his  example, 
and  therefore  is  silent  to  man,  and  reveals  everything  to  God;  he 
will  obtain  pardon. 

III.     That  it  does  not  suffice  to  confess  to  God  alone,  if  time  allows,, 
provided  it  is  possible  to  confess  to  a  man. 

But  that  it  is  necessary  to  confess  to  priests,  is  proved  not  only 
on  the  authority  of  James^ :  ''Confess  your  sins  to  one  another,"  etc.. 
but  also  by  the  testimonies  of  many  others.  For  Augustine  says^r 
''Let  a  man  of  his  own  will  judge  himself  while  he  is  able,  and  let 
him  change  his  ways  to  better,  lest  when  he  no  longer  is  able,  he  be 
judged  without  his  will  by  the  Lord;  and  when  he  has  pronounced 
upon  himself  a  sentence  of  the  severest  but  the  most  profitable 
medicine,  let  him  come  to  the  priests  by  whom  the  power  of  the  keys 
of  the  Church  is  exercised.  Just  as  one  beginning  to  be  a  good  son 
should  observe  the  order  of  his  mother's  members,  and  accept  the 
manner  of  his  satisfaction  from  those  placed  in  command  of  sacred 
things,  offering  the  sacrifice  of  a  contrite  heart  devoutly  and  humbly. 
Let  him  however  do  that  which  not  only  benefits  him  for  salvation, 
but  serves  also  for  an  example  to  others;  so  that  if  his  sin  is  not 
only  a  grievous  evil  for  him,  but  also  a  great  stumbling-block  for 
others,  and  it  seems  to  the  priest  expedient  for  the  Church,  let  him 
not  refuse  to  do  penance  to  the  knowledge  of  many  or  of  the  whole 
people,  lest  through  shame  he  inflame  the  deadly  wound."  "When-- 
the  wound  of  sin  and  the  power  of  the  disease  are  so  great,  that  the 
medicaments  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  must  be  postponed 
according  to  the  authority  of  the  priest,  each  one  ought  to  withdraw 
from  the  altar  to  do  penance,  and  then  to  be  reconciled  by  the  same 

*  James  5,  16. 

*Sermo  351.   (alias  the  last  among  the  50  Homil.)  c.  4.  n.  o;  C.  ludicet 
(85.),  ibid. 

'Augustine,  Ep.  54.  (aKas  118.  ad  Januar.)  c.  3.  n.  4;  C.  In  actione  (84.), 
ibid. 


■^ 


DISTINCTION  XVII 


183 


^; 


V 


>*' 


si 


authority."  Also  Pope  Leo^ :  "The  manifold  love  of  God  succors 
human  beings  who  have  fallen,  so  that  they  regain  their  hope  of  life 
not  only  by  baptism,  but  also  by  penance,  since  the  helps  of  the 
divine  will  have  been  so  ordained,  that  sinners  cannot  obtain  the 
indulgence  of  God  save  through  the  supplications  of  priests.  For 
Christ  gave  this  power  to  those  set  over  the  Church,  that  they  might 
give  the  satisfaction  of  penance  to  those  who  confessed,  and  when 
they  had  been  purged  by  saving  satisfaction,  they  might  admit  them 
to  the  communion  of  the  sacraments  through  the  door  of  reconcilia- 
tion." Also  Augustine^ :  "Let  him  who  repents,  repent  wholly,  and 
let  him  show  his  grief  with  tears;  let  him  present  his  life  to  God 
through  the  priest,  let  him  anticipate  the  judgment  of  God  by  con- 
fession. For  the  Lord  gave  command  to  those  who  needed  to  be 
cleansed,  that  they  show  themselves  to  the  priests,  teaching  thus 
that  sins  must  be  confessed  by  bodily  presence,  not  set  down  in 
writing."  For  he  said :  Also  all  of  you  show  yourselves ;  not  one  for 
all,  not  one  as  a  messenger  of  the  others,  to  offer  for  you  to  God 
the  gift  appointed  by  Moses;  but  you  who  have  sinned  yourselves, 
have  shame  for  yourselves.  For  shame  itself  is  part  of  the  remis- 
sion. For  out  of  pity  the  Lord  commanded  that  no  one  should 
repent  in  secret.  For  from  the  fact  that  he  speaks  for  himself  to 
the  priest,  and  conquers  his  shame,  through  the  fear  of  God's  anger 
results  the  pardon  of  his  sin.  For  it  is  made  venial  by  confession 
which  was  criminal  in  the  performance,  and  if  it  is  not  purged  at 
once,  it  is  nevertheless  made  venial,  which  was  mortal  when  he  com- 
mitted it.  For  he  has  offered  much  satisfaction  who  ruled  his  shame 
and  denied  to  the  messenger  of  God  nothing  of  those  things  which 
he  had  committed.  For  God  who  is  merciful  and  just,  just  as  he 
preserves  mercy  in  justice,  so  also  preserves  justice  in  mercy.  For 
the  work  of  mercy  is  to  forgive  the  sins  of  the  sinner ;  but  it  is  neces- 
sary that  the  just  one  show  mercy  justly.  For  he  considers  if  the 
sinner  is  worthy,  I  do  not  say,  of  justice,  but  even  of  mercy;  for 
justice  alone  condemns,  but  he  deserves  mercy  who  seeks  grace  by 
spiritual  labor.  For  the  mind  labors  when  it  suffers  shame;  and 
since  a  feeling  of  shame  is  great  punishment,  he  who  is  ashamed  for 


»  Ep.  108.  (alias  83.  ad  Theodor.  Foroiul.  episc.)  c.  2;  C.  Multiplex.  (49.),  ibid. 
«  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  (spurious),  c.  10.  n.  25;  C.  Quern  poenitet  (88.),. 
ibid.    See  Luke  17,  14  and  Levit.  14,  4. 


( 


1 84 


APPENDIX 


the  sake  of  Christ  becomes  worthy  of  mercy.  Wherefore  it  is  clear 
that  to  the  more  persons  one  confesses  the  baseness  of  his  offence, 
the  more  easily  does  one  gain  the  grace  of  remission.  For  the 
priests  themselves  are  able  to  accomplish  more  and  spare  those  who 
confess  more."  Also  Pope  Leo^ :  '* Although  a  fullness  of  faith  seems 
to  be  laudable,  which  through  fear  of  God  does  not  fear  to  be 
ashamed  before  men ;  yet — because  everyone's  sins  are  not  of  such 
a  kind  that  those  which  demand  penance  may  be  freely  published, — 
let  the  unwise  custom  be  abolished,  lest  many  be  kept  from  the 
remedies  of  penance,  because  they  are  either  ashamed  or  afraid  to 
reveal  their  deeds  to  their  enemies,  by  whom  they  may  be  ruined 
through  the  provisions  of  the  laws.  For  confession  suffices,  which 
is  first  offered  to  God,  and  then  to  the  priest,  who  acts  as  intercessor 
for  the  sins  of  the  penitents.  For  many  can  be  incited  to  penance, 
if  the  conscience  of  the  one  who  confesses  is  not  published  to  the  ears 
of  the  people." — By  these  and  many  other  statements  we  are  shown 
beyond  a  doubt  that  it  is  necessary  that  confession  be  offered  first 
to  God,  and  then  to  the  priest ;  nor  can  the  sinner  otherwise  approach 
the  entrance  of  paradise,  if  he  had  an  opportunity  to  confess. 

PART  III 

IV.     Whether  it  suffices  to  confess  to  a  layman. 

Now  before  we  cite  in  reply  to  the  authorities  previously  quoted 
those  which  seem  to  contradict  them,  let  us  consider  the  third  ques- 
tion. For  the  content  of  the  second  question,  that  is,  whether  it 
would  suffice  to  confess  to  God  alone  without  the  confession  and 
judgment  of  the  priest,  has  been  considered,  and  it  has  been  estab- 
lished by  the  testimonies  quoted,  that  it  does  not  suffice  to  confess 
to  God  without  the  priest,  nor  is  the  sinner  truly  humble  and  peni- 
tent, if  he  does  not  desire  and  seek  the  judgment  of  the  priest. 
But  is  it  of  equal  value  for  any  one  to  confess  to  a  companion 
or  to  a  neighbor,  at  least  when  the  priest  is  away  ?— Certainly  it 
can  be  said  on  this  point  that  the  examination  of  a  priest  should 
be  zealously  sought,  because  God  has  granted  to  priests  the  power 
of  binding  and  loosing.     And  therefore  those  whom  they  forgive 

^Ep.  1 68.  (alias  136.  ad  univers.  episc.  per  Campaniam)  c.  2;  C.  Quamvis 
plenitudo  fidei  (89.),  ibid. 


DISTINCTION  XVII 


185 


\ 


> 


V 


God  also  forgives.  If  however  a  priest  is  lacking,  confession  is 
to  be  made  to  a  neighbor  or  companion.  But  let  each  one  take 
care  to  seek  a  priest,  who  knows  how  to  bind  and  loose.  For 
he  ought  to  be  that,  who  judges  the  offences  of  others.  Where- 
fore Augustine^ :  "Let  him  who  wishes  to  confess  his  sins  in  order 
to  obtain  pardon,  see  a  priest  who  knows  how  to  bind  and  loose, 
lest,  if  he  be  negligent  about  himself,  he  be  neglected  by  him  who 
with  mercy  warns  and  seeks  him,  and  then  both  fall  into  the  snare, 
which  in  his  folly  he  refused  to  shun.  So  great  is  the  power  of 
confession  that  if  the  priest  is  away,  he  should  confess  to  his  neigh- 
bor. For  it  often  happens  that  the  penitent  cannot  humble  himself 
in  the  presence  of  a  priest,  whom  the  time  and  place  fail  to  supply 
when  he  desires  him.  But  although  he  confesses  to  one  who  has  not 
the  power  of  loosing,  he  becomes  worthy  of  pardon  from  his  desire 
for  a  priest,  when  he  confesses  his  sin  to  his  companion.  For  the 
lepers  were  cleansed  while  they  were  going  to  show  themselves  or 
their  faces  to  the  priests,  before  they  reached  them.  Wherefore  it 
is  clear  that  God  looks  within  at  the  heart,  when  anyone  is  pre- 
vented by  necessity  from  reaching  the  priests.  Often  persons  who 
are  well  and  happy,  seek  the  priests,  but  while  they  are  seeking  and 
before  they  arrive,  they  die.  But  the  mercy  of  God  is  everywhere, 
and  knows  how  to  spare  the  just,  even  if  not  so  quickly,  as  if  they 
were  loosed  by  the  priest."  ''And  if  the  sin  is  secret,  let  it  suffice 
to  bring  it  to  the  knowledge  of  the  priest.  For  at  the  raising  of  the 
daughter  of  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue^  few  were  present  to  witness 
it;  for  not  yet  had  she  been  buried,  not  yet  borne  out  of  the  door, 
not  yet  carried  to  public  gaze  outside  the  house.  He  raised  her 
indoors,  whom  he  found  indoors,  only  Peter  and  James  and  John 
and  the  father  and  mother  of  the  girl  were  left  with  him,  and  in 
them,  are  prefigured  the  priests  of  the  Church.  But  observe  how 
he  raised  those  persons  whom  he  found  out  of  doors.  For  a  crowd 
was  weeping  for  the  son  of  the  widow,  Martha  and  Mary  wept  pray- 
ing for  their  brother,  and  the  crowd  that  followed  Mary  also  wept. 

>  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia,  c.  10.  n.  25;  C.  Qui  vult  confiUri  (i),  ibid.  d.  6. 
See  Matt.  15,  14;  Luke  17,  14. 

The  next  passage,  ibid.  c.  11.  n.  26;  cf.  Gratian,  C.  Quis  aliquando  (87.), 
ibid.  d.  I.  §12. 

«  Matt.  9,  24;  Mark  5,  37;  Luke  7,  11;  John  11,  33.— The  following  passage 
is  in  the  same  book,  c.  12.  n.  27;  C.  Qui  vult,  modo  cit. 


i 


1 86 


APPENDIX 


Whereby  we  are  taught  that  for  those  who  sin  in  public  not  their 
own  but  the  Church's  merit  is  sufficient."    "Therefore  let  the  peni- 
tent labor  to  be  in  the  Church  and  to  hold  to  the  unity  of  the  Church. 
For  unless  the  unity  of  the  Church  succor  him,  unless  it  completes 
what  the  sinner  lacks  in  his  own  prayer,  his  soul  when  he  is  dead 
will  not  be  snatched  from  the  enemy.     For  we  must  believe  that  all 
the  prayers  and  alms  of  the  Church  and  works  of   justice  and 
mercy  help  him  who  recognizes  his  own  death  to  his  conversion. 
And  therefore  no  one  can   worthily   repent,   whom   the  unity   of 
the  Church  does  not  support;  and  therefore  let  no  one  seek  priests 
separated  by  any  guilt  from  the  unity  of  the  Church." — By  these 
words  the  matter  of  the  foregoing  question  is  made  clear  and  ex- 
plained.    A  wise  and  discreet  priest  should  be  sought,  who  with 
power  has  at  the  same  time  judgment,  and  if  by  chance  he  is  absent, 
confession   should   be   made   to  a   companion. — But   Bede^    distin- 
guishes between  confession  of   venial  and  of  mortal  sins,  in  his 
comment   in   this   passage:    "Confess   your   sins   to   one   another." 
For  he  says:  "Let  us  make  known  our  daily  and  trivial  sins  to 
our  equals,  but  the  more  serious  to  a  priest,  and  let  us  take  care 
to  purge  ourselves  of  them  within  the  time  he  bids,  because  with- 
out confession  for  amendment,  sins  cannot  be  forgiven."     But  the 
more  grievous  sins  are  also  to  be  made  known  to  our  equals,  when 
the  priest  is  away,  and  danger  threatens.    But  venial  sins,  even  when 
there  is  an  abundance  of  priests,  may  be  confessed  to  an  equal,  and 
it  is  sufficient,  as  some  think,  provided  that  the  priest  is  not  neglected 
from  contempt.     However  it  is  safer  and  more  perfect  to  make 
known  sins  of  both  kinds  to  the  priests,  and  to  seek  the  prescription 
of  medicine  from  them,  to  whom  is  granted  the  power  of  binding 
and  loosing. 

V.     What  value  confession  has. 

Since  therefore  from  these  and  many  other  testimonies  it  is 
made  clear  and  established  beyond  a  doubt  that  sins  are  to  be  con- 
fessed first  to  God,  next,  to  the  priest,  and  if  he  is  not  available,  to  a 
companion;  the  words  of  John  Chrysostom  cited  above,  are  not  to 
be  understood  in  the  sense  that  it  is  allowable  for  anyone  who 
has  time,  not  to  confess  to  a  priest;  but  that  it  suffices  where  an 


*  In  lac.  5,  i6,  and  in  Glossa  interlinearis  on  the  same  passage. 


I 


DISTINCTION  XVII 


187 


Z' 


offence  is  secret,  to  tell  it  to  God  alone,  through  the  priest  and  once 
only,  nor  is  it  necessary  to  publish  what  is  secret  in  the  presence  of 
many;  he  indicated  this  when  he  said:  "I  do  not  say  to  you  that  you 
should  denounce  yourself  in  public."     For  just  as  a  public  wrong 
needs  a  public  remedy,  so  also  a  secret  wrong  is  purged  by  a  secret 
confession  and  secret  satisfaction.    Nor  need  we  confess  again  what 
we  have  once  confessed  to  a  priest ;  but  with  the  tongue  of  the  heart, 
not  of  the  flesh,  we  should  confess  continually  to  the  true  judge! 
Wherefore  John^  also  says:  "Now  if  you  remember  your  sins,  and 
frequently  tell  them  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  pray  earnestly  for  their 
pardon,  you  will  blot  them  out  more  quickly.     But  if  you  forget 
them,  then  you  will  remember  them  when  you  do  not  wish,  when  they 
are  published  and  produced  in  the  sight  of  all  friends  and  enemies, 
and  of  the  holy  angels."— So  also  the  passage  from  Ambrose :  "Tears 
wash  away  the  sin,  which  we  are  ashamed  to  confess  with  the  voice," 
is  to  be  referred  to  public  penance.    For  he  shows  therein  the  virtue 
of  tears  and  confession,  and  implies  that  hidden  tears  and  secret 
confession,  like  that  made  to  a  priest  alone,  wash  away  the  sin,  which 
one  is  ashamed  to  confess  publicly.    But  when  he  says  he  has  read 
that  the  tears  of  Peter  were  not  satisfaction  or  confession;  by  this 
he  does  not  exclude  what  we  have  just  said.     For  many  things 
occurred,  which  are  not  written  down,  or  perhaps  the  institution  of 
confession  had  not  yet  been  established^,  as  it  is  now.— Likewise 
also  this  saying  of  Prosper:  "If  they  are  made  their  own  judges, 
they  will  alter  the  eternal  punishments" ;  and  this :  "They  will  please 
God  more  easily  who  either  make  known  their  offence  by  their  own 
confessions,  or  if  others  are  ignorant,  pass  sentence  of  excommunica- 
tion upon  themselves";  ought  to  be  understood  of  public  confession 
and  satisfaction.    For  not  to  priests  alone  was  the  power  of  binding 
and  loosing  given,  if  each  man  may  bind  himself  according  to  his  own 
judgment  by  penance  or  sentence  of  excommunication,  and  without 
sacerdotal  judgment  reconcile  himself  to  God  and  to  the  altar;  a  view 
which  is  wholly  repugnant  to  ecclesiastical  institution  and  custom. 
Therefore  it  is  better  if  you  sinned  publicly  to  confess  yourself  guilty 
publicly,  and  make  amends;  but  if  you  have  offended  in  secret,  even 
so  you  are  not  to  be  silent ;  nor  yet  do  I  say  that  you  should  proclaim 

»  Homil.  31.  in  Ep.  ad  Hebr.  n.  4;  C.  Quis  aliquando,  supra  cit.  §u 
^  So  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  10. 


i88 


APPENDIX 


it."  For  silence  about  sin  is  born  of  pride  of  heart.  For  it  is  for 
this  reason  that  a  man  conceals  his  sin,  lest  he  be  reckoned  generally 
what  he  has  shown  himself  to  be  in  the  divine  sight ;  a  fear  which 
springs  from  the  fountain  of  pride.  For  the  character  of  pride  is 
that  the  man  who  is  a  sinner  wishes  to  seem  just ;  and  a  man  is  con- 
victed of  hypocrisy  who  like  our  first  parents  tries  to  lighten  his 
sins  by  a  subterfuge  of  words,  or  Hke  Cain  aims  to  suppress  his  sins 
by  keeping  silence.  Where  therefore  pride  reigns  and  hypocrisy, 
humility  has  no  place ;  but  without  humility  no  one  is  allowed  to  hope 
for  pardon.  When  therefore  there  is  reticence  in  confession,  there 
is  no  hope  of  pardon  for  the  offence."  * — Now  certainly  it  is  clear 
how  detestable  is  silence  concerning  sin  and  conversely  how  neces- 
sary is  confession.  For  confession  is  the  witness  of  a  conscience 
which  fears  God.  For  the  man  who  fears  the  judgment  of  God  will 
not  be  ashamed  to  confess  his  sin.  Perfect  fear  casts  out  all  shame; 
the  confession  of  sin  involves  shame,  and  shame  itself  is  a  severe 
punishment.  And  therefore  we  are  commanded  to  confess  our  sins 
that  we  may  suffer  shame  as  a  punishment ;  for  this  itself  is  a  part 
of  the  divine  judgment. — If  therefore  we  are  asked  whether  confes- 
sion is  necessary,  since  by  contrition  sin  is  blotted  out;  we  say  that 
it  is  some  punishment  of  sin,  as  is  the  satisfaction  by  deed.  And 
through  confession  the  priest  knows  how  he  ought  to  judge  of  the 
offence;  through  it,  moreover,  the  sinner  is  made  more  humble  and 
careful. 


*Gratian,  C.  Quis  aliquando,  supra  cit.  §15.  See  Gen.  3,  10;  4,  9.  This 
opinion  of  the  Master,  at  the  end  is  obsolete.  Cf.  Bonaventura,  d.  18.  p.  I.  a.  2. 
q.  I. 


> 


Distinction  XVIII 


PART   I 


I.  Of  the  remission  which  the  priest  grants. 

Here  we  are  generally  asked  if  a  sin  is  wholly  forgiven  by  God, 
for  contrition  of  the  heart,  at  the  time  the  penitent  had  the  desire 
to  confess,  what  is  afterward  forgiven  by  the  priest.  For  I  know 
with  what  chain  the  priest  binds  the  sinner,  that,  namely,  of  temporal 
punishment,  but  not  from  what  he  absolves  him.  And  on  this 
account  I  ask.  Certainly  the  soul  has  the  stain  of  the  deed  and  the 
noisomeness  of  the  sin  before  the  penance  of  the  heart,  and  it  is 
bound  by  the  chain  of  eternal  vengeance.  But  if  before  confession 
God  himself  for  contrition  of  the  heart,  without  the  ministry  of  the 
priest,  both  remits  the  debt  entirely  and  purges  the  soul  from  the 
contagion  and  noisomeness  of  the  sin;  what  then  does  the  priest 
cleanse,  what  does  he  remit  ?  Where  are  those  keys  which  the  Lord 
gave  to  Peter  and  to  his  successors,  saying^ :  "I  will  give  unto  thee 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind 
on  earth,  shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt 
loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven"?  So  that  the  aforesaid 
question  may  be  explained  more  fully,  just  as  the  net  was  let  down 
deeper,  let  us  treat  of  these  keys  and  their  use. 

II.  Of  the  keys. 

These  keys  are  not  corporeal,  but  spiritual,  that  is,  "the  knowl- 
edge of  discerning  and  the  power  of  judging,'*  namely,  of  binding 
and  loosing,  by  virtue  of  which  the  ecclesiastical  judge  "ought  to 
receive  the  worthy  and  exclude  the  unworthy  from  the  kingdom," 
and  just  as  he  has  the  power  of  binding,  so  he  has  that  of  loosing. 
Wherefore  Ambrose^:  "The  Lord  wished  the  power  of  loosing  and 
of  binding  to  be  equal,  and  bestowed  both  on  the  same  condition. 
Therefore  he  who  has  not  the  power  of  loosing  does  not  have  the 


*  Matt.  16,  19.    Below,  see  Luke  5,  4. 

2  Lib.  I.  de  Poenitentia,  c.  2.  n.  7;  some  words  from  the  Glossa  of  Bede,  (in 
Lyranus),  on  the  passage  of  Matthew  cited  above. 

189 


190 


APPENDIX 


power  of  binding."  And  below^ :  "It  is  certain  that  God  grants  both 
to  the  Church,  but  heresy  has  not  both;  for  this  power  is  given  to 
priests  only.  Therefore  the  Church  rightly  lays  claim  to  it  for  her- 
self, because  she  has  true  priests ;  heresy  cannot  lay  claim  to  it,  be- 
cause it  does  not  have  true  priests. 

III.  Of  the  use  of  the  keys. 

But  there  are  several  uses  of  these  keys,  first  to  distinguish 
those  who  must  be  bound  or  loosed,  and  then  to  bind  or  loose."  For 
he  who  binds  or  looses  those  who  do  not  deserve  it,  deprives  him- 
self of  his  own  power,"  2  that  is,  makes  himself  worthy  of  depriva- 
tion. 

IV.  Whether  a  priest  can  remit  or  retain  sins. 

But  we  are  asked,  whether  a  priest  has  the  power  to  absolve 
from  sin,  that  is,  from  guilt,  so  that  he  wipes  away  the  stain  of  sin, 
and  is  able  to  remit  the  debt  of  eternal  death. — Some  have  thought 
that  when  the  sinner  is  held  doubly  bound,  as  we  said  before,  namely 
by  disease  and  blindness  of  the  mind,  and  by  the  debt  of  future 
punishment,  the  one  is  cured  by  God,  the  other  remitted  by  the  priest. 
For  a  man  suffers  through  sin  a  kind  of  interior  darkness  and  stain 
and  unless  he  is  released  from  these,  he  will  be  cast  into  outer  dark- 
ness^ ;  but  when  he  is  freed  from  these,  he  is  raised  from  the  death 
of  sin.  Wherefore  the  Apostle* :  "Rise  thou  who  sleepest,  and 
Christ  will  illumine  thee."  For  Christ  alone,  not  the  priest,  re- 
awakens the  soul,  and  when  the  interior  darkness  and  stains  have 
been  banished,  he  illumines  and  cleanses  it,  and  washes  the  face  of 
the  soul ;  but  he  has  granted  to  priests  the  power  to  loose  the  debt  of 
eternal  punishment.  This  they  assert  was  signified  in  the  resur- 
rection of  Lazarus,^  for  Christ  himself  first  brought  him  to  life 
within  the  tomb,  then  commanded  him  to  come  forth,  and  bade  the 


*  Lib.  cit.,  ibid,  below;  II.  de  Cain  et  Abel,  c.  4.  n.  15;  C.  Verbum  Dei  (51.), 
de  Poenitentia,  d.  i. 

*  Gregory,  II.  Homil.  in  Evang.  homil.  26.  n.  5. — The  first  opinion  in  the 
following  passage  is  that  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XIV.  c.  8.  near 
the  beginning,  an  attempt  to  refute  the  following  opinion. 

»  Matt.  22,  13. 

*  Eph.  5,  14. 
*John  II,  14. 


y 


DISTINCTION  XVIII 


191 


i  ^ 


apostles  loose  him  who  was  still  bound;  because,  as  they  say,  he 
himself  cleanses  the  soul  within  from  the  darkness  and  stain  of  sin, 
but  has  given  to  priests  the  power  to  loose  the  chain  of  eternal  death. 

But  others  say  that  only  God,  not  the  priest,  remits  the  debt  of 
eternal  death,  even  as  also  he  himself  makes  the  spirit  aHve  within ; 
yet  they  do  not  deny  that  to  priests  was  given  the  power  of  remitting 
and  retaining  sins,  for  to  them  he  said :  "Whose  sins  ye  remit,"  ^  etc. 
For  as  Christ  has  retained  to  himself  the  power  of  baptism,  so  also 
of  penance.  And  therefore  just  as  he  illumines  the  soul  within  by 
his  grace,  so  also  at  the  same  time  he  remits  the  debt  of  eternal  death. 
For  he  himself  of  himself  covers  the  sins  of  penitents ;  and  he  covers 
them  when  he  does  not  reserve  them  for  punishment.  Therefore  he 
covers  them  when  he  loosens  the  debt  of  punishment.  And  that  he 
himself  does  cover,  Augustine  clearly  says  in  his  explanation  of  this 
passage  of  the  Psalm^:  **Whose  sins  are  covered,"  that  is  "covered 
wholly  and  effaced.  For  if  God  covered  sins,  he  did  not  wish  to 
observe  them ;  if  he  did  not  wish  to  observe,  he  did  not  wish  to  mark 
them,  that  is  punish  them,  but  rather  to  pardon  them.  So  therefore 
Augustine  says  they  are  'covered  by  God,'  that  God  may  not  see, 
that  is,  eternally  punish."  For  God's  seeing  of  sins  is  imputing  of 
punishment.  But  to  turn  his  face  from  sins,  is  not  to  reserve  them 
for  punishment.  Also  Jerome-^ :  "When  God  remits  anyone's  sins, 
he  covers  them,  lest  they  be  revealed  in  the  judgment."  Also  Cassio- 
dorus^ :  "To  some  persons  who  have  grievous  sins,  God  imputes 
them,  to  others  through  mercy,  he  does  not  impute  them." 

From  these  citations  it  is  clearly  shown  that  God  himself 
absolves  the  penitent  from  the  debt  of  punishment,  and  absolves  him 
when  he  illumines  him  within  by  inspiring  true  contrition  of  heart. 
This  opinion  is  favored  by  reason  and  confirmed  by  the  authorities. 
For  no  one  is  truly  grieved  by  his  sin,  and  has  a  contrite  and  humble 
heart,  save  in  charity;  and  he  who  has  charity  is  worthy  of  eternal 
life.  But  no  one  is  worthy  at  the  same  time  of  life  and  of  death: 
therefore  he  is  not  bound  by  the  debt  of  eternal  death.     For  he 


*  John  20,  23. 
'■        *  Ps.  31,  i;  Enarrat.  2.  n.  9;  of.  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  50,  n.  14,  where  the  explana- 
tion of  what  follows  is  given. 

3  This  is  in  the  Glossa  ad  Ps,  31,  2. 

<  Ibid. 


192 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XVIII 


193 


ceased  to  be  a  **son  of  wrath"  from  the  time  he  began  to  love  and  do 
penance.  Therefore  from  that  time  he  was  loosed  from  wrath, 
which  does  not  remain  on  one  who  believes  on  Christ,  but  on  one 
who  does  not  believe.  Accordingly  he  is  not  freed  afterward  from 
eternal  wrath  by  the  priest  to  whom  he  confesses,  since  he  was 
already  freed  from  it  by  the  Lord,  at  the  time  he  said:  "I  will  con- 
fess." Therefore  God  alone  cleanses  a  man  inwardly  from  the  stain 
of  sin,  and  absolves  him  from  the  debt  of  eternal  punishment:  for 
he  says  through  the  Prophet*  :  *T  alone  blot  out  the  iniquities  and 
sins  of  the  people."  Also  Ambrose^:  'The  word  of  God  forgives 
sins,  the  priest  is  the  judge.  The  priest  indeed  performs  his  office, 
but  does  not  exercise  rights  of  any  power."  The  same^ :  "He  alone 
forgives  sins,  who  alone  died  for  our  sins."  Also  Augustine*:  "No 
one  takes  away  sins,  save  God  alone,  who  is  the  Lamb  that  takes 
away  the  sins  of  the  world.  Now  he  takes  them  away  both  by 
remitting  what  have  been  committed,  and  by  giving  help  so  that 
they  be  not  committed  again  and  by  leading  to  eternal  life,  where  cer- 
tainly they  cannot  be  committed." — By  these  and  many  more  testi- 
monies we  are  shown  that  the  Lord  himself  alone  remits  sin ;  and 
just  as  he  remits  the  sin  of  some  persons  so  also  he  retains  the  sins 
of  some  others. 

V.     How  priests  remit  sin,  or  retain  it. 

We  do  not,  however,  deny  that  the  power  of  remitting  and 
retaining  sins  was  conceded  to  priests,  since  the  Truth  clearly  teaches 
this  is  the  Gospel.  Hence  Augustine^  says:  *'The  charity  of  the 
Church  which  is  poured  out  by  the  holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  those 
who  are  sharers  of  it,  remits  sins ;  but  i^  retains  the  sins  of  those  who 
are  not  sharers  of  it."  Also**:  "Priests  can  spare  those  who  confess: 
for  unto  whom  they  remit  sins,  God  remits.  For  he  gave  Lazarus 
raised  from  the  tomb  to  the  Apostles  to  be  loosed,  showing  by  this 


» Is.  43,  25. 

•  II.  de  Cain  et  Abel  c.  4.  n.  15,  but  the  words  and  opinion  are  somewhat 
different;  C.  Verbum  Dei  (51.),  supra  cit. 

•  Exposit.  in  Evang.  Lucae.  lib.  VI.  n.  109. 

•  I.  de  Peccator.  merit,  et  remissione,  gathered  from  cc.  23.  28.  39;  C.  Nemo 
toUit  (141.),  de  Consecrat.  d.  4. 

'In  loan.  Evang.  tract.  121.  n.  4;  C.  Ecclesiae  (140),  ibid. 

•  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia  (spurious)  c.  10.  n.  25. 


\ 


■♦       t 


> 


act  that  the  power  of  loosing  was  granted  to  priests.  For  he  said: 
'Whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven,*  etc. ; 
that  is:  *I  God,  and  the  ofders  of  all  the  heavenly  court,  and  all  of 
the  saints  in  my  glory,  approve  and  confirm  with  you  whom  *you 
bind  and  loose.'  He  did  not  say  *whom  you  think  you  bind  and 
loose' ;  but  'on  whom  you  exercise  the  work  of  justice  or  of  mercy. 
Otherwise  I  do  not  recognize  works  of  other  kind  performed  by 
you  for  sinners.' "  The  same^ :  "When  sins  are  remitted  unto  one 
who  has  truly  turned  to  God,  they  are  remitted  by  those  to  whom 
he  is  joined  by  true  conversion.  They  are  remitted  by  the  holy 
Spirit,  who  is  given  to  all  saints  cleaving  to  him  in  charity,  whether 
they  know  him  in  the  body  or  not.  Likewise  when  anyone's  sins  are 
retained,  they  are  retained  by  those  from  whom  he  is  separated  by 
the  perverseness  of  his  heart,  whether  known  to  him  in  the  body  or 
unknown."  "For  all  the  wicked  are  spiritually  separated  from  the 
good."  2 — Behold,  he  says  that  sins  are  remitted,  or  retained  by  holy 
men,  and  yet  he  says  the  holy  Spirit  remits  them.  And,  he  also  says 
something  worthy  of  greater  consideration,  that  God  himself  or 
through  the  saints  only,  remits  them.  For  he  says^ :  "God  gives  the 
sacrament  of  grace  even  through  the  wicked,  but  grace  itself  only 
through  himself  or  his  saints.  And  therefore  he  performs  the  remis- 
sion of  sins  either  himself  or  through  the  members  of  the  dove  to 
whom  he  says:  'If  you  forgive  anyone,  he  shall  be  forgiven.'"* — 
See,  what  various  opinions  are  taught  by  the  doctors  on  these 
matters;  and  in  such  variety  as  this,  which  opinion  is  to  be  held? 
This  we  may  certainly  say  and  think,  that  God  alone  remits  sins  and 
retains  them;  and  yet  he  has  conferred  upon  the  Church  the  power 
of  binding  and  loosing,  but  he  himself  looses  or  binds  in  one  way, 
the  Church  in  another.  For  he  remits  sin  through  himself  alone, 
for  he  both  cleanses  the  soul  from  the  inner  stain  and  releases  it 
from  the  debt  of  eternal  death. 

'     VI.    How  priests  bind  or  loose  from  sins. 

But  he  did  not  grant  this  power  to  priests  although  he  did  grant 
them  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing,  that  is,  of  showing  that 

*  Aug.,  Lib.  VI.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatist.  c.  4.  n.  6. 

*  Ibid.  c.  5.  n.  7. 

*  Ibid.  V.  c.  21.  n.  29;  C.  Quomodo  exaudit  (41.),  de  Consecrat.  d.  4. 
*John  20,  23. 


194 


APPENDIX 


men  are  bound  or  loosed — wherefore  the  Lord  himself  first  restored 
the  leper  to  health,  and  then  sent  him  to  the  priests,  by  whose  deci- 
sion he  was  shown  to  be  cleansed ;  so  also  after  Lazarus  was  brought 
to  life  he  gave  him  to  the  disciples  to  be  loosed — because  even  if 
anyone  is  loosed  by  God,  he  is  not  on  that  account  held  to  be  loosed 
in  the  sight  of  the  Church,  except  through  the  judgment  of  the  priest. 
Therefore  in  loosing  or  retaining  guilt,  the  priest  of  the  Gospel  so 
works  and  judges  as  the  priest  of  the  law  in  times  past  for  those  who 
were  contaminated  with  leprosy,  which  signifies  sin.  Wherefore 
Jerome  in  his  commentary  on  Matthew,^  where  the  Lord  says  to 
Peter:  *'I  will  give  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven ; 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in 
heaven'' 2:  ''Some  persons  who  do  not  understand  this  passage/' 
he  says,  ''assume  something  of  the  superciliousness  of  the  Pharisees, 
so  that  they  think  they  are  to  condemn  the  harmless  and  loose  the 
harmful,  when  it  is  not  the  opinion  of  the  priests,  but  the  life  of  the 
doers,  which  is  regarded  by  God.  In  Leviticus  the  lepers  are  com- 
manded to  show  themselves  to  the  priests,  not  that  they  make  them 
lepers  or  clean,  but  that  they  distinguish  who  are  clean  or  unclean ; 
so  also  here." — It  is  here  clearly  shown  that  God  does  not  always 
follow  the  judgment  of  the  Church  which  judges  sometimes  dishon- 
estly and  ignorantly ;  but  God  always  judges  according  to  truth.  And 
in  remitting  or  retaining  sins  the  priests  of  the  Gospel  have  the  power 
and  office,  which  formerly  the  priests  of  the  Law  had  under  the  Law 
in  curing  lepers.  They  therefore  remit  or  retain  sins,  in  so  far  as 
they  judge  and  declare  them  to  be  remitted  or  retained  by  God.  For 
the  priests  invoke  "the  name  of  he  Lord  on  the  sons  of  Israel,  but 
he  himself  blesses,"  as  we  read  in  Numbers.^  This  way  of  binding 
and  loosing  Jerome  indicated  above. 

Priests  also  bind  when  they  impose  the  satisfaction  of  penance 
on  those  who  confess ;  they  loose  when  they  remit  any  of  the  satis- 
faction, or  admit  persons  purged  by  it  to  the  communion  of  the  sacra- 
ments, which  method  Pope  Leo  mentioned  above.^     In  this  way 


^  Lib.  in.  c.  i6.  V.  19.    See  Levit.  14,  2. 
2  Matt.  16,  19. 

*  Numbers  6,  27. 

*  Dist.  XVII.  c.  3. 


DISTINCTION  XVIII 


195 


/> 


priests  are  also  said  to  remit  sins  or  to  retain  them.  Wherefore 
Augustine  said  above^ :  **To  whom  they  remit  sins,  God  also  remits," 
etc.  For  they  perform  the  work  of  justice  on  sinners  when  they 
bind  them  by  a  just  penalty;  the  work  of  mercy,  when  they  relax 
any  of  it,  or  restore  them  to  the  communion  of  the  sacraments ;  they 
cannot  perform  other  works  for  sinners. — And  it  must  be  noted  that 
those  whom  they  bind  by  the  satisfaction  of  penance,  they  show  by 
that  very  act  to  be  loosed  from  sins,  because  penitential  satisfaction 
is  not  imposed  on  anyone  unless  the  priest  judges  him  truly  peni- 
tent. But  they  do  not  impose  it  on  others^ ;  and  by  that  they  judge 
that  the  sin  is  retained  by  God.  Now  that  this  power  belongs  to  the 
keys  Augustine  shows  when  he  says :  "He  cheats  the  keys  of  the 
Church,  who  does  penance  without  the  judgment  of  the  priest,  if  he 
prays  for  mercy  for  his  oflFence  without  confession  of  the  mouth." 


PART  II 

And  there  is  another  way  of  binding  and  loosing,  which  is  per- 
formed by  excommunication,  when  anyone  is  called  for  the  third 
time  to  amend  a  manifest  sin  according  to  the  canonical  discipline, 
and  disdaining  to  make  satisfaction,  is  cut  off  by  sentence  of  the 
Church  from  the  place  of  prayer,  and  the  communion  of  the  sacra- 
ments, and  the  fellowship  of  the  faithful,  so  that  he  may  blush  and 
be  converted  by  shame  at  his  crime,  and  may  be  sorry  and  repent, 
and  that  thus  '*his  soul  may  be  saved."  ^  Because  if  he  returns  to  wis- 
dom, avowing  his  penance,  he  is  admitted  to  the  communion,  which 
had  been  denied  him  and  is  reconciled  to  the  Church.  And  this 
is  the  anathema  of  the  Church,  it  inflicts  this  penance  on  those  who 
are  rightfully  chastised,  that  the  grace  of  God  and  his  protection  are 
farther  removed  from  them,  and  they  are  left  to  themselves,  so  as 
to  be  free  to  rush  into  the  death  of  sin  and  a  greater  power  of  wTeak- 
ing  rage  upon  them  is  given  to  the  devil.  Likewise  the  prayers  of 
the  Church  and  the  aids  of  its  benedictions  and  merits  are  not 
thought  to  support  them  at  all. 


>  Above,  c.  5. 

2  Serm.  392.  (alias,  homily  49  among  50  Homil.)  c.  3.  n.  3;    Gratian,  C.  Quis 
aliquando  (87.),  de  Poenit.  d.  i. 
» I.  Cor.  5,  5. 


196 


APPENDIX 


i 


'■'i 


\ 


VII.  How  we  are  to  understand  this  saying:  "Whatsoever  ye  shall 
loose/'  etc. 

According  to  these  ways  of  binding  and  loosing,  how  is  that 
saying  true :  ''Whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in 
heaven,  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in 
heaven?"  For  sometimes  they  declare  loosed  or  bound  those  who 
are  not  so  with  God;  and  sometimes  they  bind  by  the  penalty  of 
satisfaction  or  of  excommunication  those  who  do  not  deserve  it,  or 
loose  them,  and  admit  the  unworthy  to  the  sacraments,  and  exclude 
those  who  are  worthy  to  be  admitted.— But  the  saying  must  be 
understood  of  those  persons  whose  merits  demand  that  they  be  loosed 
or  bound.  For  then  the  opinion  of  the  priest  is  approved  and  con- 
firmed by  the  judgment  of  God  and  of  the  whole  celestial  court,  since 
it  proceeds  from  c^^scretion  so  that  the  merits  of  the  guilty  do  not 
contradict  it.  Whomsoever  therefore  they  loose  or  bind,  applying 
the  key  of  discretion  to  the  merits  of  the  guilty,  they  are  loosed  or 
bound  in  heaven,  that  is,  with  God,  because  the  opinion  of  the  priest 
thus  formed  is  approved  and  confirmed  by  divine  judgment.  Whom 
therefore  the  sentence  of  the  Church  condemns  according  to  his 
deserts,  it  destroys ;  and  the  man  is  outside  the  Church  in  the  sight 
of  God. — But  whoever  has  not  earned  it,  is  not  destroyed  by  the  sen- 
tence of  the  Church,  unless  he  scorns  it.  Wherefore  Origen^ :  "Any- 
one who  departs  from  truth,  from  faith,  from  charity,  thereby  departs 
from  the  fortress  of  the  Church,  even  if  not  cast  out  by  the  voice 
of  the  bishop,  just  as,  on  the  contrary,  no  one  is  driven  out  by  an 
unjust  judgment ;  but  if  he  did  not  so  act  that  he  deserved  to  go  out, 
he  is  not  hurt.  For  sometimes  he  who  is  driven  out,  is  inside ;  and 
he  who  is  outside,  seems  to  remain  within." — See  of  what  kind  and 
what  extent  is  the  use  of  the  apostolic  keys.  Now  it  has  been  shown 
in  part  how  the  priests  forgive  sins  or  retain  them,  and  yet  how 
God  has  retained  for  himself  a  certain  unique  power  of  remitting  or 
retaining  sins,  because  he  himself  alone  by  himself  looses  the  debt 
of  eternal  death,  and  purges  the  soul  within. 

VIII.  IV hat  the  inner  darkness  and  inner  stains  are. 

Here  we  are  asked  what  these  stains  are  and  what  this  inner 
darkness,  from  which  God  cleanses  the  soul  within,  when  he  sends 


*  Horail.  14.  in  Levit.  n.  3. 


V, 


DISTINCTION  XVIII 


197 


» 


true  penance.— As  for  the  darkness  and  the  inner  gloom  it  is  easy 
enough  both  to  understand  and  to  answer.     For  when  anyone  sms 
mortally,  he  is  deprived  of  the  grace  of  virtue,  if  he  had  previously 
possessed  any,  and  he  suffers  the  destruction  of  his  natural  good  qual- 
ities.   Wherefore  also  the  intellect  is  dulled,  and  the  whole  inner  man 
is  darkened ;  and  thus  his  mind  is  enveloped  in  a  sort  of  obscurity, 
which  is  the  punishment  of  sin.    But  this  obscurity  God  dispels,  when 
he  sends  penance,  through  which  he  restores  the  good  qualities  which 
were  destroyed,  and  repairs  those  which  were  injured.    Wherefore 
the  Prophet! :  "He  scatters  the  mists  as  ashes."— But  what  is  the 
stain  of  sin,  from  which  he  cleanses  the  soul?     Suppose  now  that 
a  man  has  wished  to  commit  murder  and  has  accompUshed  it,  and 
when  he  has  accomplished  it,  he  ceases  both  to  desire  it  and  to  do  it; 
but  he  does  not  yet  truly  and  humbly  do  penance,  nor  does  he  pur- 
pose to  confess.^   What  stain  therefore  has  remained  in  his  soul? 
An  evil  will  certainly  was  the  stain  of  his  soul,  but  that  has  passed ; 
also  it  is  a  stain  if  he  scorns  to  do  penance;  but  this  sin  is  different 
from  the  preceding.    What  stain  therefore  has  remained,  from  which 
he  is  purged  in  penance  ?— The  soul  is  surely  polluted,  until  the  peni- 
tent does  penance,  even  as  it  was,  while  the  evil  will  was  in  it.    For 
just  as  a  man  who  touches  carrion  or  any  other  unclean  thing,^  is 
polluted  after  the  touch  until  he  washes,  just  as  he  was  while  he  was 
touching  it;  so  after  the  act  of  sin  the  soul  remains  polluted  just  as 
it  was  in  the  very  act  of  sin,  because  through  unlikeness  it  is  as  far 
from  God,  who  is  the  life  and  purity  of  the  mind,  as  it  was  while  it 
was  committing  the  sin.    Therefore  that  very  unlikeness  which  is  the 
mark  of  the  soul  from  sin  and  is  a  removal  from  God  is  understood 
as  the  stain  of  the  soul,  from  which  it  is  purged  in  penance.     But 
the  purging  God  alone  performs,  who  alone  awakens  the  soul  and 
illumines  it ;  and  the  priests  are  unable  to  perform  it,  although  they 
are  the  physicians  of  souls.    Wherefore  the  Prophet^  :  "Shall  physi- 
cians raise  to  life,  and  give  praise  to  thee?"    Explaining  this  passage 
Augustine  says* :  "Good  teachers  are  rightly  called  physicians,  for 
they  are  able  to  cure  the  living  by  their  ministry,  but  not  to  arouse 
the  dead ;  for  only  by  the  grace  of  God  are  the  dead  made  alive  again. 

1  Ps.  147,  16. 

^  Levit.  II,  31;  Numbers  19,  22. 
»Ps.  87,  II. 
*  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  87.  n.  10. 


M 
1 


'■    > 


DISTINCTION  XIX 


199 


Distinction  XIX 

I.     When  these  keys  are  given  and  to  whom. 

Now  that  it  has  been  shown  what  the  apostolic  keys  are,  and  what 
their  use  is ;  it  remains  to  find  out  when  these  keys  are  given,  and 
to  whom. — These  keys  are  given  by  the  ministry  of  the  bishop  to 
a  man  when  he  is  promoted  to  the  priesthood ;  for  when  he  receives 
the  sacerdotal  orders,  he  also  receives  these  keys  at  the  same  time. — 
But  it  does  not  seem  that  all  priests  or  only  priests  have  these  keys, 
because  many  have  the  knowledge  to  distinguish  before  sacred  ordi- 
nation, and  many  lack  it  after  consecration.  We  can  say  rightly 
that  all  priests  do  not  have  one  of  these  keys,  namely,  the  knowl- 
edge to  distinguish,  on  which  account  we  must  grieve  and  lament. 
For  many  persons,  although  indiscreet  and  lacking  the  knowledge 
in  which  they  ought  to  excel,  presume  to  receive  the  grade  of 
priesthood,  unworthy  of  it  in  life  and  in  knowledge,  who  neither 
before  priesthood,  nor  after,  have  the  knowledge  to  distinguish, 
who  should  be  bound  and  who  loosed.  Therefore  they  do  not 
receive  that  key  in  ordination,  because  they  always  lack  the  knowl- 
edge. But  those  who  before  priesthood  are  endowed  with  the 
knowledge  to  discern,  although  they  have  discretion,  yet  have  not 
the  key,  because  they  have  not  the  power  to  close  or  open  with  it. 
Therefore  when  a  man  is  promoted  to  the  priesthood,  he  is  rightly 
said  to  receive  the  key  of  discretion,  because  the  discretion  he  had 
before  is  increased  and  is  made  a  key  for  him,  so  that  then  he  has 
power  to  use  it  for  closing  or  opening. 

And  since  it  is  now  evident  that  not  all  priests  have  these  two 
keys,  because  many  lack  the  knowledge  to  distinguish;  as  regards 
the  other  key,  that  is,  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing,  we  are  asked 
whether  all  priests  have  that. — For  some  think  the  power  is  granted 
only  to  those  who  follow  both  the  doctrine  and  life  of  the  apostles. 
For  the  Lord  promised  the  keys  only  to  Peter  and  his  imitators,  they 
say ;  and  they  cite  authorities  in  support  of  their  opinion.  For  they 
The  same  in  his  commentary  on  Exodus,^  where  the  golden  plate  is 


*  Preceding  distinction,  c.  5,  that  is,  V.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatist.  c.  21. 


n.  29. 


198 


\ 


) 


> 


himself  or  through  the  members  of  the  dove  gives  remission  of  sins.'* 
Augustine  also  says  that  sins  are  remitted  or  retained  by  the  saints. 
The  same  in  his  commentary  on  Exodus,^  where  the  golden  plate  is 
spoken  of :  ''And  there  was  always  a  golden  plate  on  the  brow  of 
the  priest" :  'This,"  he  says,  "signifies  the  assurance  of  a  good  life, 
and  only  the  priest  who  has  this  truly  and  perfectly,  not  in  symbol, 
but  in  truth,  can  take  away  sins."  Also  Gregory^ :  'They  only,  while 
in  the  flesh,  have  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  like  the  holy 
apostles  who  follow  their  examples  as  well  as  their  doctrines."  Also 
from  the  words  of  Origen:  'This  power  was  granted  to  Peter  only, 
and  to  the  imitators  of  Peter.  For  those  who  imitate  the  steps  of 
Peter,  have  rightly  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing."  By  these 
and  many  other  testimonies  they  support  their  case,  who  assert  that 
the  power  of  binding  and  of  loosing  was  granted  to  those  priests 
only,  who  in  life  and  doctrine  are  equal  to  the  apostles. 

But  it  seems  to  others,  and  also  I  confess  to  me,  that  to  all 
priests  is  given  this  key,  that  is,  of  binding  and  loosing;  but  they  do 
not  have  it  rightly  and  worthily  unless  they  follow  the  apostolic  life 
and  doctrine.  Nor  do  the  preceding  authorities  deny  that  evil  priests 
have  this  power,  but  they  mean  that  only  those  priests  use  the  power 
worthily  and  rightly,  who  are  endowed  with  apostolic  life  and 
doctrine,  because  only  the  imitators  of  the  apostles  themselves  can 
worthily  and  rightly  bind  and  loose.  And  only  by, the  Lord  or  by 
saints  in  whom  the  holy  Spirit  dwells,  is  remission  or  retention  of 
sins  worthily  and  rightly  awarded.  Nevertheless  it  is  awarded  also 
by  those  who  are  not  saints,  but  not  worthily  or  rightly.  For  God 
gives  benediction  to  one  who  worthily  asks  it,  even  through  an  un- 
worthy minister.  But  that  all  priests  have  this  power,  Jerome^  testi- 
fies in  his  exposition  of  that  passage  of  the  Gospel  where  the  Lord 
said  to  Peter:  "I  will  give  you  the  keys  of  heaven":  "For  other 
apostles,"  he  says,  "have  the  same  judiciary  power;  and  the  whole 
Church  has  it  through  the  bishops  and  presbyters.     But  Peter  re- 


^  II.  Quaestion.  in  Pentateuch,  q.  120;  see  Exod.  28,  38. 

2  Lib.  II.  Homil.  in  Evang.  homil.  26.  n.  4.  seq.;  II.  Dialog,  c.  23;  cf.  Sum. 
Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  14,  where  is  also  found  the  following  passage  of  Origen,  Comment, 
in  Matt.  Lib.  XII.  n.  9. 

3  Not  found  in  Jerome,  but  in  the  Glossa  Matt.  16,  17.  and  in  Rabanus, 
V.  Comment,  in  Matt.  loc.  cit.,  who  took  the  first  part  from  Bede,  on  the  same 
passage.    Cf.  also  C.  Si  iustus  (30.),  C.  l.  q.  i.  and  C.  Ut  evitentur  (82.),  ibid. 


200 


APPENDIX 


J 


DISTINCTION  XIX 


201 


ceived  it  specially  so  that  all  might  know  that  whosoever  separates 
himself  from  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  the  fellowship  of  the  Church, 
can  neither  be  loosed  from  sin  nor  enter  heaven/' 

II.     Whether  worthy  grace  can  he  imparted  by  an  unworthy  priest. 

Also  that  a  priest,  even  if  he  be  wicked,  yet  imparts  grace  ac- 
cording to  the  office  of  his  dignity,  Augustine^  shows  when  he  says : 
"The  Lord  spake  in  Numbers,  to  the  priests  Moses  and  Aaron: 
*Invoke  my  name  on  the  sons  of  Israel,  and  I  the  Lord  will  bless 
them' ;  so  that  he  might  impart  to  men  the  grace  given  through  the 
ministry  of  a  priest  ordained,  nor  might  the  will  of  the  priests  hinder 
or  profit  it,  but  the  merit  of  the  one  who  asked  a  benediction.  But 
let  us  now  consider  how  great  the  dignity  of  the  sacerdotal  office 
and  order  is.  It  is  said  among  other  things  of  the  wicked  Caiaphas : 
*But  this  he  did  not  speak  of  himself,  but  since  he  was  the  high-priest 
of  that  year,  he  prophesied' ;  by  which  it  is  shown  that  the  Spirit  of 
graces  does  not  have  regard  to  the  person  of  a  worthy  or  unworthy 
man  but  to  his  order  by  consecration ;  so  that  no  matter  how  great 
merit  anyone  may  have,  he  cannot  bless  unless  he  has  been  ordained, 
that  he  may  perform  the  ministry  of  his  office.  But  it  belongs  to  God 
to  give  the  eflfect  of  benediction."— Hereby  it  is  clearly  shown  that 
the  office  is  not  deprived  of  the  power  of  granting  grace  on  account  of 
unworthiness  in  the  minister. — To  this  opinion  of  Augustine,  how- 
ever, the  words  of  Hesychius^  seem  opposed:  "Priests,"  he  says, 
*'do  not  bless  by  their  own  power,  but  because  they  represent  Christ, 
and  on  account  of  him  who  is  in  them,  grant  the  fullness  of  benedic- 
tion; nor  is  it  only  he  who  has  received  priesthood,  but  whoever 
has  Christ  in  him,  and  bears  his  image  through  good  conversation, 
like  Moses,  is  suitable  to  give  benediction."— Behold  here  you  have 
that  not  only  the  priest,  but  everyone  in  whom  Christ  dwells  may 
give  the  benediction.  But  there  is  one  benediction  which  is  suited 
to  priests  alone,  another  which  is  used  in  common  by  all  good  men. 
Finally  those  priests,  in  whom  Christ  dwells,  are  said  to  impart  the 
fullness  of  benediction,  not  because  they  alone  transmit  grace,  but 
because  they  alone  lawfully  and  worthily  do  it.     Nor  does  the  evil 


»Quaestion.  ex  veteri  testam.  (spurious)  q.  ii;  C.  Dictum  est  (96.),  ibid. 
See  Num.  6,  27,  and  below  John  11,  51- 
«  Lib.  II.  in  Levit.  (9,  23.) 


\ 


y 


■  f 


life  of  the  priest  hurt  persons  placed  under  him,  if  they  do  the  good 
deeds  which  he  tells  them.  Wherefore  Gregory^ :  "Many,  while  they 
scrutinize  the  life  of  the  priests  more  than  their  own,  fall  into  the 
pitfall  of  error,  not  considering  that  the  life  of  the  priests  would 
not  hurt  them  if  they  would  humbly  lend  their  ears  to  the  good 
admonitions  of  the  priests." 

IIL     How  we  must  understand  the  words:  "I  will  curse  your  bless- 


ings 


)> 


But  the  preceding  view,  that  even  through  the  ministry  of  an 
evil  priest,  the  grace  of  benediction  is  transmitted,  seems  contradicted 
by  the  warning  of  the  Lord  against  evil  priests  through  the  prophet 
Malachi^:  "I  will  curse  your  blessings";  and  in  another  place,^ 
"Woe  to  those  who  save  souls  alive  which  do  not  live,"  and  *'kill 
souls  which  do  not  die."  For  if  the  Lord  curses  their  blessings  and 
if  the  souls  which  they  save  alive  do  not  live,  how  is  the  grace  of 
benediction  transmitted  through  them?— But  this  chapter:  "I  will 
curse,"  etc.,  is  applied  by  some  persons  to  the  heretics  who  are  cut  off 
from  the  Church,  and  to  the  excommunicate  whose  benedictions  are 
made  maledictions  to  those  who  follow  their  errors.  And  this  other 
passage,  namely :  'They  save  alive,"  etc.,  they  interpret  of  all  those 
priests,  who  without  the  key  of  knowledge  and  the  form  of  a  good 
life  presume  to  bind  or  loose.  But  no  one  ought  to  fill  the  office  of 
priest,  unless  he  be  immune  from  those  sins  which  he  judges  in 
others ;  otherwise  he  condemns  himself. 

IV.     What  sort  of  man  the  ecclesiastical  judge  ought  to  be. 

Now  what  sort  of  man  he  ought  to  be  who  is  appointed  judge 
of  others,  Augustine  describes  when  he  says* :  ''A  priest  to  whom 
is  brought  every  sinner,  before  whom  every  weakness  is  declared, 
ought  not  to  be  liable  to  judgment  for  any  of  those  oflfences,  which 
he  is  prompt  to  judge  in  another.  For  in  judging  another,  a  man 
who  deserves  to  be  judged,  condemns  himself.     Therefore  let  him 


*  Can.  Multi  saecularium  (84.),  ibid. 

2  Mai.  2,  2. 

3  Ezek.  13,  19. 

*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitentia,  c.  20.  n.  36.  (among  his  works) ;  C.  Qui  vuU 
confiteri  (i.)  de  Poenitentia.  d.  6.  §  2.  3.    See  Rom.  2,  i,  and  next  John  8,  7. 


202 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XIX 


205 


know  himself,  and  purge  in  himself  the  guilt  that  he  sees  others 
present  to  him ;  let  him  take  care  to  cast  out  from  himself  whatever 
he  finds  to  be  condemned  in  others.    Let  him  remember,  *he  who  is 
without  sin,  let  him  first  cast  a  stone  upon  her.'    For  the  Lord  freed 
the  sinful  woman,  because  there  was  not  one  who  could  justly  cast  a 
stone.    How  should  he  stone,  who  recognized  himself  as  deserving 
to  be  stoned  ?    There  was  no  one  without  sin ;  by  which  we  under- 
stand that  all  had  been  guilty  of  crime,  for  venial  sins  were  remitted 
through  ceremonies ;  therefore  whatever  sin  was  in  them  it  was  crim- 
inal.    Hereby  therefore  it  is  clear  that  we  are  to  detest  the  crime 
of  priests,  who  do  not  judge  themselves  before  they  bind  others. — 
Let  the  spiritual  judge  beware  that  as  he  has  not  committed  the 
offence  of  negligence,  so  he  lacked  not  the  gift  of  knowledge;  it  is 
necessary  that  he  should  understand  what  he  ought  to  judge.     It  is 
essential   for   judicial  power   to   distinguish   what   it   must  judge. 
Therefore  let  the  diligent  investigator  wisely  ask  of  the  sinner  what 
perhaps  he  does  not  know  or  wishes,  with  a  natural  feeling  of  shame, 
to  conceal.    And  when  the  oflFence  is  understood,  let  him  not  hesitate 
to  investigate  its  details,  both  the  place,  and  the  time,  and  other 
matters  of  which  we  spoke  above,  and  when  he  has  learned  these, 
let  him  be  benevolently  helpful,  ready  to  rise  and  bear  the  burden 
with  the  sinner:  let  him  have  sweetness  in  his  affection,  discre- 
tion  in  variation,  let  him  teach   perseverance,   let  him  take   care 
lest  he  fall,  lest  he  justly  destroy  his  judiciary  power.    Even  if  pen- 
ance could  win  back  grace  for  him,  yet  it  would  not  soon  restore 
him  to  his  former  power.    Even  if  Peter  after  his  fall  was  restored, 
and  the  power  of  their  rank  is  often  returned  to  fallen  priests,  yet  it 
is  not  necessarily  given  back  to  everyone,  as  if  by  authority.     One 
authority  is  found  which  gives  and  as  it  were  commands;  other 
authority  is  found  which  does  not  give  but  forbids.    And  the  Scrip- 
tures do  not  contradict  this  but  agree.    For  since  there  are  so  many 
who  fall,  that  with  authority  they  might  insist  upon  their  former 
dignity  and  form  a  sort  of  habit  of  sinning,  the  hope  of  doing  so 
must  be  cut  off.     But  wherever  there  is  a  place  where  such  things 
do  not  occur,  the  priests  who  sin  can  be  restored." — By  these  words 
it  is  clearly  indicated  what  sort  of  man  a  priest  ought  to  be  who  binds 
and  looses  others,  namely  discreet  and  just;  otherwise  he  often  kills 
souls,  which  are  not  dead  and  saves  alive  those  which  are  not  alive ; 
and  so  he  falls  under  the  judgment  of  the  curse.    But  the  passage  of 


Malachi,  namely:  'T  will  curse  your  blessings,"  whether  the  words 
be  applied  to  heretics  only  and  to  excommunicants,  or  to  all  priests,, 
who,  though  lacking  in  life  and  knowledge,  presume  to  bless,  can 
be  thus  interpreted :  I  will  curse  your  blessings,  that  is,  "those  which 
you  possess  in  these  blessings,"  ^  because  I  will  make  them  turn  to 
a  curse  upon  you,  not  a  blessing,  for,  even  if  they  bless  saints,  they 
do  not  do  it  from  a  true  heart,  and  therefore  their  blessing  is  turned 
into  a  curse  upon  them.  Or  "I  will  curse  your  blessings,"  that  is, 
''what  is  blessed  by  you  will  be  cursed  by  me,"  because  they  bless 
those  who  do  evil  and  they  flatter  sinners,  provided  they  are  rich. 


^  This  and  the  following  passage  is  from  Jerome,  on  Malachi  2,  2. 


V 


f: 


i  .' 


\ 


V 


DISTINCTION  XX 


205 


Distinction  XX 

PART    I 

I.     Of  those  zclw  repent  at  the  end. 

We  must  also  realize  that  the  time  for  penance  extends  even 
to  the  last  moment  of  life.    Wherefore  Pope  Leo^ :  *'No  one  should 
be  despaired  of  while  he  is  still  in  this  body,  because  sometimes  an 
act  which  is  deferred  by  the  diffidence  of  youth,  is  carried  out  by  a 
maturer  purpose."    Augustine  however  writes  as  follows  about  those 
who  defer  their  penance2 .  *'if  anyone  at  the  last  extremity  wishes  to 
receive  penance,  and  if  he  receives  it  and  is  soon  reconciled,  and  goes 
hence,  I  acknowledge  to  you,  that  we  do  not  refuse  him  what  he  asks, 
but  we  do  not  conclude  that  he  departs  in  blessedness;  if  he  goes 
hence  safely,  I  do  not  know.    We  are  able  to  give  penance,  but  not 
safety.    Do  I  say  he  will  be  condemned  ?    But  neither  do  I  say  he 
will  be  freed.    Therefore  do  you  wish  to  be  free  from  doubt?     Do 
penance  while  you  are  well.    If  you  do  so,  I  say  to  you  that  you  are 
secure,  because  you  did  penance  when  you  could  have  sinned.     If 
you  wish  to  do  penance  when  you  cannot  sin,  the  sins  have  left  you, 
not  you  them."    Also^  :  'There  are  two  alternatives :  either  you  will 
not  be  pardoned,  or  you  will  be  pardoned ;  which  of  these  will  be 
yours,  I  do  not  know:  therefore  hold  to  what  is  certain,  and  leave 
what  is  uncertain."    But  why  did  Augustine  say  this,  when  the  pen- 
ance, which  is  performed  at  the  end,  is  called  in  the  psalm  an  "even- 
ing sacrifice"  *  *Svhich  was  more  acceptable  in  the  Law,"  and  when 
on  whatever  day  God  is  invoked,  he  is  present,  and  at  whatever  hour 
the  sinner  laments  and   is  converted   he  shall   live   and  not   die? 
Augustine  said  this  on  their  account  who  defer  penance  to  the  end 
of  life ;  and  then  do  not  seem  to  repent  from  love  of  God,  but  from 


»Ep.  167  (alias  92.)  ad  Rustic.  Inquis.  7;  C.  Nemo  desperandus  (i.),  de 
Poenitent.  d.  7. 

2  Sermo  393.  (alias  41.  among  50  Homil.);  C.  Si  quis  positus  (2.),  ibid. 
»  Serm.  cit.;  C.  Si  quis  autem  (4.),  ibid.  §  i. 
*Ps.  140,  2;  next  Ps.  55,  10;  Ezek.  18,  21. 

204 


' '  .^j'* 


'        ^ 


fear  of  death,  as  though  of  necessity.    Wherefore  again,^  as  though 
explaining  why  he  said  the  above,  he  says :  "Let  no  one  wait  for  the 
time  when  he  cannot  sin.     For  God  requires  freedom  of  the  will, 
not  necessity  to  efface  what  has  been  committed ;  love  not  only  f ear^ 
because  man  does  not  live  in  fear  only.    Whoever  therefore  repents^ 
ought  not  only  to  fear  the  judge,  but  to  love  him;  because  no  one 
can  be  saved  without  love.     Let  him  therefore  not  only  fear  the 
penalty,  but  let  him  long  for  glory.    And  if  conversion  come  to  any- 
one at  the  end,  we  are  not  to  despair  of  his  remission.     But  since 
seldom  or  rarely  is  such  a  conversion  so  just,  we  must  fear  for  a  late 
penitent,  especially  when  the  children  whom  he  has  unlawfully  loved 
are  present,  when  his  wife  and  the  world  call  him  to  themselves.  Late 
penance  is  wont  to  deceive  many.     But  since  God  is  always  mighty,, 
he  can  always  help  even  in  death  those  whom  he  will.    Since  there- 
fore fruitful  penance  is  the  work  not  of  man  but  of  God ;  he  can- 
inspire  it  when  he  wills  by  his  mercy,  and  can  reward  with  mercy 
those  whom  in  justice  he  could  condemn.    But  since  there  are  many 
things  which  impede  and  deter  a  sick  man,  it  is  dangerous  and  near 
to  ruin,  to  defer  the  remedy  of  penance  until  death.    But  it  is  a  great 
remedy  for  him  in  whom  God  then  inspires  true  penance,  if  there 
is  any  such  person."    "But  even  if  the  person  thus  converted  lives 
and  does  not  die,  we  do  not  promise  that  he  will  escape  all  penalty. 
For  first  he  must  be  purged  by  the  fire  of  purgatory,  since  he  has 
deferred  to  another  world  the  fruits  of  conversion,  and  this  fire,  even 
though  it  is  not  eternal,  yet  it  is  severe  to  an  extraordinary  degree; 
for  it  surpasses  all  punishment,  which  anyone  has  ever  suffered  in 
this  life.    Such  punishment  is  never  endured  in  the  flesh,  although 
the   martyrs   suffered   wonderful   torments,  and   many   have   often 
endured  great  punishments  wrongly!" — From  these  quotations  we 
are  shown  sufficiently  how  dangerous  it  is  to  defer  penance  to  the 
end  of  life.    If  however  a  man  has  true  penance  even  then,  it  frees 
him  and  secures  life  for  one  who  is  dead ;  yet  not  so  that  he  knows  no 
punishment,  unless  by  chance  the  vehemence  of  his  groaning  and 
contrition  is  so  great,  that  it  suffices  for  the  punishment  of  his  sin. 
"Therefore  although  it  is  difficult  to  have  true  penance  when  it  comes 
so  late,  when  pain  besets  the  members  and  grief  oppresses  the  senses, 


*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitent.  (spurious)  c.  17.  n.  33;  following  passage,  ibid, 
c.  18.  n.  34;  both  in  C.  Nullus  expectet  (6.),  ibid. 


V' 


2o6 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XX 


207 


so  that  a  man  can  hardly  think  at  all,  yet  late  penance  is  better  than 
none."  ^  "For  penance  even  if  it  comes  at  the  last  gasp  of  hfe,  heals 
and  frees."  2  'The  penance  of  the  thief  was  very  late;  but  the 
pardon  was  not  late."  ^  But  "although*  the  thief  in  the  end  gained 
pardon  from  all  sin,  God  did  not  give  to  persons  baptized  authority 
to  sin  and  persevere." 

II.     Of  those  who  do  not  complete  penance. 

But  if  we  are  asked  concerning  those  persons  who  do  not  com- 
plete penance  in  this  life,  whether  they  will  go  through  the  fire^  of 
purgatory,  in  order  to  complete  what  here  they  failed  to  do  in  part ; 
we  say  that  we  must  think  the  same  of  them  as  of  those  who  repent 
at  the  last.  For  if  there  is  such  contrition  of  heart  and  remorse  for 
sin  that  it  suffices  to  punish  sin;  they  go  to  eternal  life  free  of  all 
penalties,  even  if  their  penance  was  incomplete,  because  they  did 
penance  perfectly  and  groaned  in  heart.  But  those  who  are  not  so 
bruised  in  heart  and  do  not  groan  so  for  sin,  if  they  depart  before 
the  completion  of  their  penance,  they  shall  endure  the  fire  of  purga- 
tory, and  suffer  more  grievously  than  if  they  had  completed  the  pen- 
ance here;  "for  it  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God."  For  since  God  is  merciful  and  just,  he  mercifully  for- 
gives the  penitent,  not  reserving  his  sin  to  eternal  punishment,  but 
in  justice  he  does  not  forgive  unpunished  sin.  And  either  man  pun- 
ishes, or  God.  Man  punishes  by  doing  penance,  but  God  by  demand- 
ing penance.  There  is  both  an  inner  penance,  and  an  outer.  If 
therefore  the  inner  penance  is  so  great,  that  it  is  a  sufficient  avenging 
of  sin,  God  who  knows  this,  does  not  demand  further  penance  from 
him  who  did  so  great  a  penance.  But  if  the  inner  penance  is  not 
sufficient  to  avenge  the  sin,  and  the  outer  penance  is  not  complete, 
God  who  knows  the  kinds  and  measures  of  sins  and  of  punishments, 
adds  a  sufficient  punishment.  "Let  a  man  therefore  study  so  to 
correct  his  sins,  that  after  death  he  need  not  endure  punishment. 


^  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XIV.  c.  5. 

*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitent.  c.  17.  n.  33;  can.  cit. 
'  Hugh,  loc.  cit. 

*  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitent.  loc.  cit.  a  little  above.    See  Luke  23,  42. 

*  See  Heb.  10,  31.    For  the  following,  cf.  Aug.,  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  44.  n.  18 
and  Ps.  58,  serm.  i.  n.  13. 


> 


For  some  mortal  sins  are  made  venial  by  penance ;  yet  they  are  not 
immediately  healed.  For  often  a  sick  man  would  die,  if  he  were  not 
treated,  yet  the  physician  does  not  immediately  cure  him.  He  is 
feeble  afterwards  though  destined  to  live,  who  before  was  about  to 
die.  But  he  who  dies  impenitent,  dies  utterly,  and  is  eternally  tor- 
tured.   For  if  he  should  live  always,  he  would  always  sin."  ^ 

PART  II 

III.     Of  him  on  whom  an  indiscreet  priest  enjoined  penance. 

But  if  we  are  asked  regarding  a  man  who  has  fulfilled  the 
satisfaction  required  of  him,  which  through  the  ignorance  or  negli- 
gence of  the  priest  was  not  adequate  for  the  sin,  whether  when  he 
departs  this  Hfe,  he  is  free  of  all  punishment;  I  make  the  same 
answer  as  I  did  above^  for  him  who  did  not  complete  his  penance, 
that  if  the  lament  of  inner  grief  is  so  great  that  it  suffices  to 
avenge  the  sin,  he  is  entirely  freed;  but  if  the  inner  grief  together 
with  the  penance  enjoined  upon  him  does  not   suffice,   God   will 
add  punishment.    But  that  sometimes  inner  grief  suffices  to  avenge 
sin,  we  have  a  sure  proof  in  the  case  of  that  thief,  who  only  through 
contrition  of  the  mind  and  confession,  won  entrance  into  paradise  as 
soon  as  he  was  converted.    But  because  the  stewards  of  the  Church 
do  not  weigh  exactly  the  quantity  of  contrition,  since  they  are  not 
permitted  to  know  the  secrets  of  hearts;  they  establish  laws  of 
penance  for  all  who  grieve  whether  more  or  less  for  their  sin.    Their 
zeal  ought  to  aim  chiefly  at  weighing  the  grief  of  the  heart  as  much 
as  is  right,  so  that  according  to  its  degree  they  may  enjoin  satisfac- 
tion.   Wherefore  Augustine^  :  "In  the  performing  of  penance,  where 
an  act  has  been  committed,  so  serious  as  to  separate  from  the  body 
of  Christ  the  man  who  has  committed  it ;  we  must  not  consider  so 
much  the  extent  of  time  of  the  penance  as  the  extent  of  the  grief : 
Tor  a  contrite  and  humble  heart  God  will  not  despise.'    But  because 
often  the  grief  of  one  heart  is  hidden  from  another  and  does  not 
come  to  the  notice  of  others  unless  it  is  revealed  by  words  or  by 


1  De  vera  et  falsa  Poenitent.  c.  18.  n.  34;  can.  cit.  On  the  last  proposition, 
cf.  Gregory,  XXXIV.     Moral,  c.  19.  n.  36. 

*  Here  c.  2.    See  Luke  23,  43. 

»  Enchirid.  c.  65.  n.  17;  C.  /n  actione  (84.),  de  Poenitent.  d.  i.  See  Ps.  50, 
19.  37.  10  and  II.  Cor.  5,  5. 


208 


APPENDIX 


'k 


^ 


|i 


some  other  signs,  although  it  is  open  to  him  to  whom  it  is  said:  'My 
groaning  is  not  hid  from  thee' ;  for  this  reason  times  of  penance  have 
rightly  been  established  by  those  who  rule  over  the  Churches,  so  that 
the  sinner  may  satisfy  the  Church,  where  the  sins  themselves  are 
remitted;  for  outside  it  they  certainly  are  not  remitted.  For  it 
receives  the  holy  Spirit  as  a  pledge,  without  whom  no  sins  are  re- 
mitted." Also  Jerome^ :  "The  canons  therefore  do  not  fix  clearly 
enough  the  length  of  time  for  doing  penance  for  each  crime,  so  as  to 
say  of  particular  sins  how  each  should  be  amended ;  but  rather  they 
have  determined  that  it  should  be  left  to  the  judgment  of  an  under- 
standing priest,  because  with  God  the  measure  of  time  is  not  of  such 
value  as  the  measure  of  grief,  nor  abstinence  from  food  as  morti- 
fication of  vices.  Therefore  they  enjoin  that  the  seasons  of  penance 
be  shortened  for  the  faith  and  conversation  of  faithful  penitents;  for 
certain  faults,  however,  measures  of  penance  are  imposed." 

IV.     That  satisfaction  should  not  be  required  of  the  dying,  but  men- 
tioned to  them. 

We  are  often  asked  also,  whether  the  law  of  satisfaction  should 
be  imposed  on  persons  about  to  die.  Of  this,  Theodore  bishop  of 
Canterbury  says  in  his  penitential2 :  ''Simple  confession  of  sins 
should  be  asked  of  the  sick  in  danger  of  death,  but  the  full  extent  of 
penance  should  not  be  imposed  on  them,  though  it  must  be  mentioned, 
and  the  weight  of  penance  should  be  lightened  by  the  prayers  of 
friends  and  by  the  bestowal  of  alms,  if  by  chance  the  sick  depart 
this  life.  But  if  they  regain  their  health,  let  them  fulfill  diligently 
the  measure  of  penance  imposed  by  the  priest."  And  for  other 
persons  the  penance  must  be  determined  by  the  judgment  of  those  in 
authority  according  to  the  nature  of  their  sin.  Wherefore  Pope 
Leo^ :  "The  times  of  penance  must  be  fixed  by  your  judgment  with 
moderation,  according  as  you  observe  that  the  souls  of  the  converts 
are  devout.    Equally  also  you  ought  to  have  regard  for  old  age  and 


» Rather  Alcuin,  de  Divinis  Officiis,  c.  13,  who  cites  Jerome;  C.  Mensuram 
autem  (86.),  ibid. 

«  Fragments  c.  48.  (Migne,  Patrol.  Lat.  XCIX.  col.  977);  C.  Ah  infirmis 

(i.),  C.  26.  q.  7. 

» Ep.  159.  (alias  79.)  ad  Nicetam  Episc.  c.  6;  C.  Tempora  poenitudinis  (2.), 

ibid. 


DISTINCTION  XX 


209 


/ 


♦  ' 


to  be  mindful  of  dangers  of  all  sorts  and  of  the  necessities  of  dis- 


ease 


>> 


V.  In  an  emergency  penance  and  reconciliation  must  not  be  denied. 

We  must  also  understand  that  in  a  time  of  emergency  penance 
and  reconciliation  must  not  be  denied  to  penitents.  Wherefore  Pope 
Leo^  :  ''Satisfaction  must  not  be  forbidden  nor  reconciliation  denied 
to  those  who  in  a  time  of  necessity  and  urgent  danger  implore  the 
help  of  penance  and  speedy  reconciliation,  because  we  can  set  no- 
measure  to  the  mercy  of  God,  nor  limit  the  times."  *'And  if^  they 
are  so  prostrated  by  some  sickness,  that  they  cannot  at  the  moment 
make  known  what  shortly  before  they  asked  for,  the  testimonies  of 
faithful  bystanders  ought  to  aid  them,  and  they  should  obtain  at  the 
same  time  the  benefit  of  penance  and  reconciliation."  Also  Pope 
Julius^ :  '*If  a  presbyter  denies  penance  to  the  dying,  he  will  be  the 
one  responsible  for  their  souls,  because  the  Lord  says :  *When  he  is 
converted,  then  will  he  be  saved.'  For  there  can  be  true  confession  at 
the  last,  because  God  is  a  respecter  not  only  of  the  time  but  also  of 
the  heart,  as  the  case  of  the  thief  proves." 

VI.  That  a  presbyter  should  not  reconcile  anyone,  without  consult- 

ing the  bishop,  uttless  necessity  compels  it. 

However  a  presbyter  ought  not  reconcile  a  penitent  without  con- 
sulting the  bishop,  unless  extreme  necessity  compels  it.  Wherefore 
in  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Carthage*:  "A  presbyter  shall  not 
reconcile  a  penitent  without  consulting  the  bishop  unless  the  bishop 
is  absent  or  extreme  necessity  compels  it.  In  the  case  of  a  penitent 
whose  offence  is  a  public  one,  that  has  disturbed  a  whole  city,  let 
hands  be  laid  on  him  before  the  choir,  that  is,  at  the  entrance  to  the 
church."  Likewise^  Bishop  Aurelius  said:  "If  anyone  in  danger 
seeks  to  be  reconciled  at  the  divine  altar  when  the  bishop  is  absent, 
the  presbyter  need  not  consult  the  bishop  but  reconcile  the  one  in 
peril  without  the  bishop's  command."     But  without  consulting  the 


*  Ep.  108.  (alias  91.)  ad  Theod.  c.  4;  C.  His  qui  tempore  (10.),  C.  26.  q.  6. 
2  Ibid.  c.  5;  C.  His  qui  tempore  (10.),  op.  cit. 

'  Can.  Si  presbyter  (12.),  ibid.    See  Ezek.  18,  21.  27  and  I.  Kings  16,  7. 

*  Can.  Presbyter  (14.),  ibid. 

*  C.  Aurelius  episcopus  (5.),  ibid. 


y. 


210 


APPENDIX 


I 


I 


I 


bishop,  a  presbyter  cannot  reconcile  the  excommunicate  or  public 
penitents.  Wherefore  it  was  decided  in  the  second  Council  of 
Carthage^  ''that  chrism  or  the  reconciliation  of  penitents  and  the 
consecration  of  virgins  should  not  be  performed  by  presbyters." 
Also^:  "A  presbyter  is  not  permitted  to  reconcile  anyone  during 
public  Mass."  The  consecration  of  virgins,  however,  can  be  per- 
formed by  a  presbyter,  if  the  bishop  is  consulted.  Wherefore  in 
the  second  Council  of  Carthage^  :  ''A  presbyter  should  not  consecrate 
virgins  without  consulting  the  bishop,  and  he  should  never  admin- 
ister the  chrism."  As  a  presbyter  can  consecrate  virgins  at  the  com- 
mand of  the  bishop,  so  he  can  also  reconcile  penitents. 

VII.     Whether  we  can  accept  the  oblation  of  the  man  who  on  his 
way  to  penance  is  prevented  by  death. 

And  if  we  are  asked  whether  we  are  to  receive  the  oblation  of 
a  man  who  when  hastening  to  penance  cannot  find  a  priest,  and  so 
departs  this  life ;  we  say,  that  we  are  to  receive  it.  Wherefore  in  the 
canons  of  the  Council  of  Apanea^ :  "If  anyone  die,  who  has  not  con- 
fessed, but  has  a  good  report  and  could  not  reach  the  priest  but  was 
overcome  by  death  in  his  home  or  on  the  way,  let  his  kinsfolk  make 
his  oblation  for  him  at  the  altar,  and  let  them  give  money  to  redeem 
captives." 


I  Can.  Si  iubet  (i.),  ibid. 

>  Ibid. 

»  Can.  Presbyter  inconsulto  (2.),  ibid. 

*  (Alias  Apanensi.)  C.  Si  aliguis  (11.),  ibid. 


r 


Distinction  XXI 


PART  I 


I.  Of  sins  which  are  remitted  ofter  this  life. 

We  are  also  often  asked  whether  any  sins  are  remitted  after  this 
life.  That  some  are  remitted  after  this  life  Christ  shows  in  the  Gos- 
pel when  he  says^ :  "Whosoever  sins  against  the  holy  Spirit,  it  shall 
not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the  world  to  come." 
From  which  we  are  to  understand,  as  the  holy  doctors  declare,  that 
some  sins  will  be  forgiven  in  the  future.  "For  some  sins  are  par- 
doned in  this  world,  but  some  little  ones  are  also  remitted  in  the 
future;  certainly  those  which  burden  sinners  after  death  are  for- 
given, if  they  are  worthy,  if  by  good  works  in  this  Hfe  they  have 
deserved  to  be  forgiven."  2 

II.  Of  those  who  build  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay, 

stubble. 

Of  those  persons  who  build  "wood,  hay,  stubble"  Augustine^ 
says  that  they  shall  find  the  fire  of  transitory  tribulation  burning  the 
inflammable  structures,  which  they  have  carried  with  them.  For 
he  says:  "Certainly  after  the  death  of  this  body,  when  souls  are 
passing  from  the  fire  of  purgatory  to  the  day  of  damnation  and 
recompense,  during  this  interval  of  time  the  spirits  of  the  dead,  who 
built  up  wood,  hay,  stubble,  are  said  to  endure  a  sort  of  fire  which 
others  who  have  not  carried  with  them  such  structures  do  not  feel, 
that  they  may  find  the  fire  of  transitory  tribulation  burning  up 
venial  oflFences;  I  will  not  deny  this  statement,  because  it  may  be 
true."  "But  because  it  is  said:  'He  will  be  saved  so  as  by  fire,'  this 
fire  is  despised.  However  this  fire  will  be  more  severe  than  anything 
which  a  man  can  suflfer  in  this  life."  * — Here  it  is  clearly  indicated 


3.  12. 


*Matt.  12,  32;  Lk.  12,  10. 

*  Gregory,  IV.  Dialog,  c.  39  and  C.  Qualis  hinc  (4.),  d.  25. 

*  Lib.  XXI.  de  Civ.  Dei,  c.  26.  n.  4.    (Cf.  Enchirid.  c.  69.  n.  18.)    See  I.  Cor. 

*  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  37.  n.  3.    See  I.  Cor.  3,  15. 

211 


,v 


ff 


212 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXI 


213 


that  those  who  build  wood,  hay,  stubble  carry  with  them  certain 
inflammable  structures,  that  is,  venial  sins ;  which  are  burned  up  in 
the  correcting  fire.  Wherefore  it  is  established  that  some  venial  sins 
are  eflfaced  after  this  life. 

III.  That  some  persons  are  more  quickly,   others  more   slowly, 

purged  in  the  fire  of  purgatory. 

Now  some  are  purged  more  slowly,  others  more  quickly  in  this 
purging  fire,  according  as  they  have  loved  more  or  less  the  things 
which  perish.  Wherefore  Augustine^ :  ''It  is  not  incredible  that  after 
this  Hfe  some  of  the  faithful  are  saved  through  a  certain  purging  fire 
more  quickly  or  more  slowly  according  as  they  have  loved  more  or 
less  the  good  things  that  perish.'' 

IV.  What  it  means  to  build  wood,  hay,  stubble. 

Therefore  the  Apostle  did  not  idly  distinguish  the  three, 
"wood,  hay,  stubble,"  which  those  men  build  who,  even  if  they  do 
not  steal  others'  goods,  nevertheless  cleave  with  a  kind  of  love  to 
things  which  are  a  concession  to  weakness ;  and,  according  to  their 
degrees  of  loving  them  they  will  endure  the  fire  either  longer  as 
wood,  or  less  as  hay,  or  least  as  stubble.  But  those  who  build  ''gold, 
silver,  and  precious  stone"  are  safe  from  both  fires,  not  only  from  the 
eternal,  which  will  torture  the  impious  forever,  but  also  from  that 
correcting  fire,  by  which  some  persons  who  are  to  be  saved,  will  be 
purged."  * 

Here  someone  may  object:  if  by  wood,  hay,  stubble,  venial  sins 
are  to  be  understood,  and  no  one  is  so  perfect  as  not  to  sin  venially: 
then  those  who  build  gold,  silver  and  precious  stone,  build  also  wood, 
hay,  stubble :  therefore  they  will  pass  through  the  fire. — To  this  we 
say  that  not  everyone  who  sins  venially,  builds  wood,  hay,  stubble ; 
just  as  on  the  contrary,  not  every  one  who  contemplates  God,  and 
loves  his  neighbor  and  does  good  works,  builds  gold,  silver,  and 
precious  stone.  And  yet  by  "gold"  is  understood  the  contemplation 
of  God,  by  "silver"  the  love  of  one's  neighbor,  by  the  "precious 
stone"  good  works.    But  those  who  build  "wood,  hay,  stubble,"  con- 


*  Enchirid.  c.  69.  n.  18. 

*  This  and  what  follows  is  gathered  from  several  passages  of  Augustine  as 
Enarrat.  in  Ps.  80.  n.  21;  in  Ps.  37.  n.  3;  de  Fide  et  operibus  c.  15.  16. 


] 


Y 


y 


template  God,  and  love  their  neighbor,  and  do  good  works,  but  they 
do  not  build  "gold,  silver,  and  precious  stone." 

V.     What  it  is  to  build  gold,  silver,  precious  stones. 

For  he  builds  these,  who  does  these  three  so  that  he  thinks  the 
thoughts  that  are  God's  and  how  he  may  please  God,  not  the  world. 
"But  by  'wood  and  hay  and*  stubble'  we  may  understand  worldly 
things,  although  those  that  are  lawfully  allowed,  such  lusts  as  cannot 
be  given  up  without  grief  of  soul."  ^     Therefore  he  who  thinks  the 
thoughts  of  the  world  and  how  he  may  please  the  world,  builds 
these,  "he  is  bound  by  some  carnal  love  for  his  riches,  and  yet  does 
much  good  with  his  wealth,  and  does  not  commit  any  fraud  or 
rapine  for  it."  2_From  these  quotations,  then,  it  is  clear  that  the 
same  man  does  not  build  the  one  and  the  other  at  the  same  time.    For 
one  building  is  only  done  by  the  perfect  who  do  not  think  of  pleasing 
the  world,  but  only  of  pleasing  God ;  and  even  if  they  sometimes  sin 
venially,  their  sin  is  consumed  within  them  by  the  fervor  of  charity^ 
as  a  drop  of  water  in  a  fiery  furnace ;  and  therefore  they  never  carry 
with  them  what  can  be  burned.    But  the  other  worse  building  is  the 
work  of  lesser  men,  who  think  to  please  not  only  God,  but  also  the 
world,  yet  prefer  God.    For  if  they  preferred  the  world,  they  would 
not  build  but  destroy  the  foundation.    Therefore  their  carnal  affec- 
tions through  which  they  are  devoted,  their  homes,  wives  and  pos- 
sessions, yet  so  that  they  prefer  nothing  to  Christ,  are  signified  by 
those  three  wood,  hay,  stubble ;  which  do  not  enter  the  minds  of  the 
perfect,  even  if  they  admit  other  venial  sins;  but  sometimes  they 
last  in  the  hearts  of  the  lesser  men  to  the  end  and  they  die  with 
these  structures,  are  but  parted  from  them  in  the  fire :  they  will  be 
saved  by  the  merit  of  their  foundation  and  yet  will  feel  the  severest 
punishment.     From  this  it  appears  how  great  is  the  "mercy"  which 
God  shows  here  and  how  great  is  the  "truth"  which  he  maintains 
there,  since  he  punishes  the  same  sin  much  more  severely  there  than 
here.** 


*  August.,  Enchirid.  c.  68.  n.  18. 

*  August.,  de  Fide  et  operibus  c.  16.  n.  27. 

»  Cf.  Gregory,  II.  Homil.  in  Evang.,  homil.  33.  n.  4  and  XVI.  Moral,  c.  67. 


n.  81. 


«Ps.  84,  II. 


J 


214 


APPENDIX 


V- 


DISTINCTION  XXI 


21 


VI.  That  one  may  do  penance  truly  for  one  venial  sin,  even  if  not 

for  every  one. 

But  perhaps  you  will  say  that  we  must  understand  this  saying^ 
of  the  punishment  of  sin,  not  of  the  sin  itself,  because  Gregory^  says 
that  some  light  offences  are  remitted  in  the  future.  For  if  a  man 
does  true  penance,  all  his  sins  are  forgiven  him,  but  perhaps  the  pun- 
ishment remains;  therefore  if  he  die  truly  penitent,  he  departs  with- 
out sin;  but  if  he  is  not  truly  penitent  in  death,  he  carries  a  stain 
which  will  never  be  effaced.  But  he  who  builds  up  wood,  hay, 
stubble  does  penance  truly,  because  he  is  good  and  has  charity  and 
departs  this  life  in  charity:  therefore  he  departs  without  sin. — 
It  does  not  follow:  it  is  indeed  true,  that  he  is  good,  and  has 
charity,  and  does  penance  truly;  and  yet  he  departs  with  venial 
sin,  which  penance  has  not  effaced.  For  penance  effaces  only 
the  sin  which  a  man  abandons.  But  this  kind  of  sin  is  often 
not  abandoned  by  a  man  in  this  life,  and  yet  he  is  truly  penitent,, 
even  though  he  does  not  do  penance  for  all  his  venial  sins.  For  a 
man  can  do  penance  for  every  mortal,  and  for  every  venial  sin, 
except  one  or  more  venial  sins ;  just  as  a  man  may  have  charity,  and 
one  or  more  venial  sins,  but  this  cannot  in  any  way  be  possible  with 
criminal  offences.  For  there  may  be  a  good  man  who  has  charity 
but  loves  the  things  of  this  world  with  a  sort  of  affectionate  desire; 
and  while  he  is  in  this  state,  he  is  overcome  by  sudden  death:  he  is 
dead  in  his  worldly  affection,  and  yet  he  will  be  saved,  though  he  did 
not  free  himself  from  it  here:  therefore  after  this  life  he  will  be 
purged  from  it.  So  it  is  evident  that  some  sins,  that  is  trivial  ones, 
are  remitted  after  this  Hfe.  But  if  our  authors  had  wished  this  say- 
ing to  be  understood  of  the  punishment  of  sin,  why  did  they  mention 
trivial  rather  than  grievous  ones,  when  the  punishment  of  grievous 
ones,  which  has  not  been  completed  here,  continues  after  this  Hfe. 

PART   II 

VII.  What  general  confession  is. 

Next  we  must  consider  what  profit  there  is  in  that  confession 
where  the  particular  sins  which  one  has  done,  are  not  enumerated. — 
We  can  say  rightly,  that  all  criminal  offences  ought  to  be  men- 
tioned at  least  once  in  confession,  unless  some  have  escaped  the  mind. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Dialog,  c.  39.    Cf.  n.  2.  p.  8. 


r 


( 


V 


But  because  no  one  knows  all  his  sins,  confess  generally  at  least  those 
which  you  do  not  remember,  and  then  you  will  not  have  concealed 
any  of  your  sins.  But  it  is  sufficient  to  confess  generally,  venial  sins, 
because  they  are  innumerable,  unless  some  are  frequently  repeated; 
nevertheless  it  is  more  perfect  to  state  these  also  if  you  can.  There- 
fore general  confesson  is  made  daily  in  the  Church  for  the  venial 
sins  which  we  commit  daily,  and  for  those  mortal  sins  of  which  we 
have  no  knowledge.  Wherefore  Augustine^ :  *The  penitent  speaks 
the  truth  to  God,  when  he  conceals  from  him  none  of  the  sins  he  has 
committed;  not  that  God  would  be  ignorant  of  them,  even  if  the 
penitent  concealed  them  deliberately,  but  God  wishes  the  penitent  to 
tell  him  the  truth,  so  that  he  may  obtain  pardon.  But  if  any  sins 
escape  his  mind,  he  confesses  the  truth  to  God  when  he  says  gen- 
erally: *0  God,  who  knowest  the  secrets  of  the  heart,  and  from 
whom  my  deeds  and  sins  are  not  hid,'  for  them  I  pray  that  thou 
wouldst  grant  pardon.  And  this  is  the  truth  of  confession  which 
God  loves."  Wherefore :  "For  behold  thou  hast  loved  truth." — Here 
it  is  implied  that  general  confession  effaces  even  the  mortal  sins,  of 
which  we  have  no  knowledge. 

VIII.  That  no  one  ought  to  confess  sins,  which  he  has  not  done. 

But  as  the  penitent  ought  not  conceal  his  sin,  because  that  is 
pride;  so  he  ought  not  for  the  sake  of  humihty  confess  himself 
guilty  of  what  he  knows  he  has  not  committed,  because  such  humility 
is  dangerous,  and  makes  him  a  sinner.  Wherefore  Augustine^: 
"When  you  lie  for  the  sake  of  humihty,  if  you  were  not  a  sinner 
before  you  lied,  by  lying  you  have  done  what  you  tried  to  avoid.  The 
truth  is  not  in  you,  unless  you  call  yourself  a  sinner  just  in  so  far 
as  you  know  you  are.  It  is  the  truth  itself,  that  you  call  yourself 
what  you  are.    For  how  is  there  truth  where  falsehood  rules  ?" 

IX,  Of  the  punishment  of  the  priest  who  publishes  the  sins  of  one 

who  has  confessed. 

"But  let  the  priest  take  care  lest  he  betray  to  others  the  sins  of 


*  Lib.  V.  Hypognost.  (among  Augustine's  works)  c.  i.  n.  i.  See  Ps.  68,  6 
and  below  Ps.  50,  8. 

2  Sermo  181.  (alias  29.  de  Verbis  Apost.)  c.  4.  n.  5;  C.  Cum  humUiUUis  (9.)» 
C.  22.  q.  2. 


2l6 


APPENDIX 


those  who  confessed,  otherwise  let  him  be  deposed.  Wherefore  Greg- 
ory: "Let  a  priest  above  all  take  care  not  to  repeat  to  anyone  the 
sins  which  are  confessed  to  him,  neither  to  relatives  nor  to  strangers  ; 
nor.  Heaven  forbid,  for  the  sake  of  a  scandal.  For  if  he  do  this 
he  should  be  deposed,  and  pass  all  the  days  of  his  life  wandering 
about  branded  with  shame."  ^  "But  the  saying,^  that  a  penitent 
should  choose  a  priest  who  knows  how  to  bind  and  loose,  seems  to 
be  contrary  to  the  directions  in  the  canons,  namely,  that  no  one 
should  presume  to  judge  another's  parishioner.  But  it  is  one  thing 
to  scorn  one's  own  priest  from  prejudice  or  hatred,  as  the  canons 
forbid,  and  another  to  avoid  a  blind  priest,  which  Urban  warns  us  to 
do,  lest  'if  the  blind  lead  the  blind,  both  fall  into  the  pit.' "  For 
Urban  II  says:  "We  have  determined  that  no  priest  hereafter  should 
be  allowed  to  receive  for  penance  anyone  committed  to  another 
priest,  without  the  consent  of  the  priest  to  whom  he  had  previously 
committed  himself,  except  on  account  of  the  ignorance  of  the  priest 
to  whom  he  had  previously  confessed.  And  a  priest  who  tries  to  act 
contrary  to  this  rule,  will  be  in  danger  of  losing  his  office." 


*  So  in  C.  Sacerdos  ante  (2.),  de  Poenitent.  d.  6.    Not  found  in  Gregory. 
2  Dist.  XVII.  c.  4. — From  Gratian,  can.  cit.    See  Matt.  15,  14.    The  words 
of  Urban  follow  there  in  the  next  C. 


^ 


I 

V 


1 


/ 


\ 


> 


^' 


Distinction  XXII 

I.     Whether  pardoned  sins  return. 

And  since  it  has  been  asserted  above^  by  many  authorities,  that 
sins  are  pardoned  through  true  contrition  of  the  heart  before 
the  confession  of  the  mouth,  or  satisfaction  of  deeds,  even  to  a 
man  who  has  at  some  time  relapsed  into  sin;  we  are  asked, 
whether  if  after  contrition  of  heart  the  man  scorns  to  confess 
or  falls  into  the  same  sin  or  a  like  one,  his  pardoned  sins  may 
return.  The  solution  of  this  problem  is  obscure  and  perplexing, 
since  some  assert,  but  others  on  the  contrary  deny,  that  sins  once 
pardoned  are  again  recalled  for  punishment.  But  those  who  say 
that  pardoned  sins  return,  support  their  position  by  the  following 
testimonies.  Ambrose  says^:  "Pardon  each  other,  if  a  man  sins 
against  another ;  otherwise  God  recalls  your  pardoned  sins.  For  if  he 
is  despised  in  these  ways  he  will  without  doubt  recall  the  sentence  by 
which  he  granted  mercy,  as  we  read  in  the  Gospel  of  the  wicked 
servant,  who  was  found  unmerciful  to  his  fellow-servant."  Also 
Rabanus^ :  "God  gave  the  wicked  servant  to  the  torturers,  until  he 
should  pay  all  his  debt ;  because  not  only  the  sins  which  a  man  did 
after  baptism  will  be  accounted  unto  him  for  punishment,  but  even 
the  original  sins  which  were  forgiven  him  in  baptism."  Also  Greg- 
ory* :  "From  these  words  of  the  Gospel  it  is  evident  that  if  we  do 
not  forgive  from  our  whole  heart  the  transgression  committed  against 
us,  the  offence  will  be  held  against  us  again,  which  we  rejoiced 
to  think  was  forgiven  us  through  penance."  Likewise  Augustine^ : 
"God  says:  'Forgive  and  it  shall  be  forgiven  thee';  but  I  first 
forgave,  do  thou  forgive  afterwards.  For  if  thou  dost  not  for- 
give I  will  recall  thee,  and  I  will  turn  back  upon  thee  whatever 


»  Dist.  XVII.  c.  I.  and  XIV.  c.  ult. 

2  In  Epist.  ad  Ephes.  4, 32 ;  cf .  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XIV.  c.  9. 
See  Matt.  18,  33. 

3  Si  ludas  (i),  de  Poenitent.  d.  4.  §  i. 

*  Lib.  IV.  Dialog,  c.  60;  C.  Constat  ex  dictis  (2.),  ibid. 
6  Serm.  83.  (alias  15.  de  Verbis  Dom.)  c.  6.  n.  7;  C.  Dixit  Dominus  (3.), 
ibid.    See  Luke  6,  37. 

217 


2l8 


APPENDIX 


I  forgave."  Also^ :  "The  man  who,  unmindful  of  divine  benefits, 
wishes  to  avenge  his  own  injuries,  not  only  shall  not  deserve 
pardon  for  his  future  sins,  but  shall  have  the  past  ones,  which 
he  believed  were  already  forgiven  him,  turned  back  upon  him 
for  punishment."  Also  Bede^:  **  *I  will  return  into  my  house,'  etc.: 
This  verse  must  be  feared,  not  explained,  lest  the  sin  which  we  be- 
Heved  extinguished  in  us,  should  because  of  our  negligence  oppress 
us  when  we  are  idle."  Also^ :  "For  whatever  lays  hold  of  us  after 
baptism,  whether  heretical  error  or  worldly  desire,  will  quickly  cast 
us  down  to  the  depths  of  all  wickedness."  Also  Augustine* :  "That 
pardoned  sins  return  where  there  is  no  brotherly  love,  the  Lord 
teaches  clearly  in  the  Gospel  in  the  parable  of  the  servant  from  whom 
his  lord  demanded  the  debt,  which  had  been  remitted,  because  he 
would  not  forgive  his  fellow-servant  his  debt." — They  depend  on 
these  authorities  who  say  that  pardoned  sins,  if  repeated,  simply  re- 
turn.— To  them  we  may  object:  if  anyone,  for  the  sin  of  which  he 
has  repented  and  received  indulgence,  is  punished  again,  it  does 
not  seem  just.  If  he  is  punished  for  a  sin  which  he  sinned  and  did 
not  amend,  the  justice  is  clear;  but  if  what  was  pardoned  is  again 
called  to  account,  it  is  either  injustice,  or  hidden  justice.  For  God 
seems  *to  judge  the  same  thing  twice,'  and  'double  affliction  to 
arise'  ^ ;  and  this  the  Scripture  denies. — But  to  this  argument  we  can 
reply  that  double  tribulation  does  not  arise,  nor  does  God  judge  the 
same  thing  twice.  For  this  would  be  the  case,  if  after  worthy  satis- 
faction and  sufficient  punishment  God  should  again  punish,  but  the 
man  has  not  made  satisfaction  worthily  and  sufficiently,  if  he  has  not 
persevered.  For  he  ought  to  keep  a  perpetual  memory  of  his  sin, 
not  in  order  to  commit  it,  but  in  order  to  avoid  it ;  he  ought  not  to 
forget  all  the  retributions  of  God  which  are  as  many  as  his  remis- 
sions of  sins:  so  he  ought  to  consider  that  the  gifts  of  God  are  as 
many  as  his  afflictions,  and  to  give  thanks  for  them  to  the  end.    But 


1 C.  Qui  divini  (4.),  ibid.;  Aug.  Serm.  83.  ibid. 

*  Lib.  IV.  in  Evang.  Luc.  11,  24;  C.  Revertar  in  dotnum  (5.),  ibid. 

*  Ibid.  v.  26;  C.  Quaecutnque  enim  (6.),  ibid. 

*  Lib.  I.  de  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  c.  12.  n.  20;  C.  Quomodo  exaudit 
(41.),  de  Cons.  d.  4. 

*  Nahum  i,  9;  cf.  Dist.  XV.  c.  i.     For  the  following,  cf.  Aug.,  Enarrat.  in 
Ps.  102.  n.  3.  4.    See  Ps.  102,  2  and  II.  Pet.  2,  22. 


I 


DISTINCTION  XXII 


219 


because  the  ungrateful  man  has  returned  to  his  vomit,  like  a  dog,  he 
has  killed  the  good  things  which  he  did  before,  and  has  recalled 
the  remitted  sin,  so  that  God  who  had  before  forgiven  his  sin  when 
he  was  humbled,  may  impute  it  afterwards  when  he  is  lofty  and 
ungrateful. 

But  because  it  seems  inconsistent  that  pardoned  sins  should  be. 
imputed  again,  some*  persons  hold  that  no  one  is  punished  ag^in  by 
God  for  sins  once  pardoned ;  but  for  this  reason  pardoned  sins  are 
said  to  return  and  be  imputed,  because  on  account  of  ingratitude  the 
man  becomes  as  guilty  and  as  much  a  sinner  as  he  was  before.  For 
thus  the  sin  that  had  been  pardoned  is  said  to  be  brought  to  account, 
because  the  man  is  ungrateful  for  the  remission  he  received,  and  be- 
comes as  guilty  as  he  was  before. — Both  answers  to  the  question  are 
supported  by  the  approved  doctors ;  therefore  I  pass  no  sentence  in 
favor  of  either,  but  leave  the  judgment  to  the  studious  reader,  adding 
that  it  will  be  safe  for  me  and  close  to  salvation  to  eat  the  crumbs 
under  the  tables  of  the  lords.^ 

II.     What  the  sacrament  is,  and  what  the  thing. 

After  the  foregoing,  it  remains  to  inquire  what  the  sacrament 
is,  and  what  the  thing,  in  the  act  of  penance.  For  a  sacrament  is  the 
sign  of  a  sacred  thing;  what  therefore  is  the  sign  here? — Some 
say,  as  Grandulph,  that  the  sacrament  here  is  what  is  done  outwardly 
only,  that  is,  the  outer  penance,  which  is  the  sign  of  the  inner  pen- 
ance, that  is,  of  contrition  of  the  heart  and  humility. — If  this  be  so, 
not  every  sacrament  of  the  gospel  accomplishes  that  which  it  figures ; 
for  the  outward  penance  does  not  effect  the  inward;  rather  the 
inward  is  the  cause  of  the  outward.  But  to  this  argument  they  reply 
that  this  rule  must  be  understood  of  those  sacraments  which  were 
instituted  in  the  New  Testament ;  that  is,  the  sacraments  of  baptism^ 
confirmation  and  of  the  body  of  Christ.  But  the  sacrament  of  pen- 
ance, as  also  that  of  marriage,  existed  before  the  time  of  grace,  even 
from  the  beginning  of  the  human  race.^  For  both  were  instituted 
for  our  first  parents. — Also,  if  outer  penance  is  the  sacrament,  and 
inner  the  thing  of  the  sacrament,  the  thing  more  often  precedes  the 


^  As  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  13. 

2  Matt.  15,  27. 

3  Gen.  2,  22  (marriage),  Gen.  3,  18  ff.  (penance.) 


y 


^ 


220 


APPENDIX 


sacrament,  than  the  sacrament  the  thing.— But  not  even  this  is  incon- 
sistent. For  it  often  happens  also  in  other  sacraments  which  accom- 
plish what  they  figure. 

But  some  say  that  both  outer  penance  and  inner  are  the  sacra- 
ment, not  two  sacraments,  but  one,  as  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine 
are  not  two  sacraments,  but  one.  And  as  in  the  sacrament  of  the 
body,  so  abo  in  this  sacrament  they  say  that  one  is  the  sacrament 
only,  that  is,  outer  penance ;  another  the  sacrament  and  the  thing, 
that  is,  inner  penance;  another  the  thing  and  not  the  sacrament, 
that  is,  the  remission  of  sins.  For  inner  penance  is  both  the  thing 
of  the  sacrament,  namely,  of  outer  penance,  and  the  sacrament 
of  the  remission  of  sin,  which  it  signifies  and  accomplishes.  Outer 
penance  is  both  the  sign  of  the  inner  and  of  the  remission  of  sins. 


1 


Distinction  XXIII 

I.  Of  the  sacrament  of  extreme  unction. 

"Beside  the  preceding,  there  is  also  another  sacrament,  that  is, 
the  unction  of  the  sick,  which  is  administered  at  the  end  of  hfe, 
with  oil  consecrated  by  the  bishop."  ^  "And  there  are  three  kinds  of 
unction." 

II.  Of  the  three  kinds  of  unction. 

"For  there  is  the  unction,  which  is  performed  with  the  chrism, 
which  is  called  the  principal  unction,  because  through  it  especially 
the  Paraclete  is  given.  Wherefore  also  on  account  of  the  abundance 
of  grace  it  contains  two  liquids  mixed,  namely,  oil  and  balsam,  the 
oil  of  conscience,  the  balsam  of  good  report.  And  it  is  called 
'Chrism'2  in  Greek,  'unction'  in  Latin.  But  not  all  oil  sanctified  for 
unction  is  called  chrism,  but  only  that  which  is  mixed  with  balsam, 
with  which  the  heads  of  kings  and  bishops  are  anointed,  and  with 
which  the  priest  anoints  the  baptized  on  the  head,  and  the  bishop 
anoints  those  who  are  to  be  confirmed  on  the  brow  with  the  laying 
on  of  hands.  And  there  is  another  unction  wnth  which  catechumens 
and  neophytes  are  anointed  on  the  breast  and  between  the  shoulders, 
when  they  receive  baptism.  But  the  third  unction  is  that  which  is 
called  the  oil  of  the  sick ;  and  of  this  we  will  now  treat." 

III.  By  whom  this  sacrament  was  instituted. 

"This  sacrament  of  the  unction  of  the  sick  is  said  to  have  been 
instituted  by  the  apostles.  For  James  says^ :  *Is  any  sick  among 
you?  Let  him  call  in  the  priests  of  the  Church,  and  let  them  pray 
over  him,  anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  the 
Lord  shall  raise  him  up;  and  if  he  be  in  sins,  they  shall  be  forgiven 
him.'    In  this  passage  we  are  shown  that  the  sacrament  was  insti- 


^  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  15.    The  following  quotation  and  all  of  c.  II.  is  from 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XV.  c.  i ;  c.  III.  is  ibid.  c.  2. 

*  Greek,  xp^fffut, 

*  James  5,  14.  15.    Following  passage  is  also  from  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  6.  c.  15. 

221 


/';! 


222 


APPENDIX 


tuted  for  a  double  purpose,  namely  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  for 
the  relief  of  bodily  infirmity.  Wherefore  it  is  plain  that  he  who 
receives  this  unction  faithfully  and  devoutly,  is  relieved  both  in  body 
and  in  soul,  provided  it  is  expedient  that  he  be  relieved  in  both.  But 
if  perhaps  it  is  not  expedient  for  him  to  have  bodily  health,  he 
acquires  in  this  sacrament  that  health  which  is  of  the  soul."  "And 
as  in  the  other  sacraments,  so  also  in  this,  the  ^sacrament'  is  one 
thing,  and  the  'thing  of  the  sacrament'  another.  The  ^sacrament'  is 
the  outer  unction  itself,  the  'thing  of  the  sacrament'  the  inner  unction, 
which  is  accomplished  by  the  remission  of  sins  and  the  increase  of 
virtues.  And  if  this  sacrament  is  omitted  from  contempt  or  neglect, 
it  is  dangerous  and  damnable." 

IV.     Of  the  repetition  of  this  sacrament. 

Some  persons  ask  whether  this  sacrament  can  be  repeated,  since 
baptism  and  some  other  sacraments  when  once  received  are  not  to 
be  repeated.  Augustine  says,^  "The  sacrament  must  not  be  repeated, 
and  injury  must  not  be  done  to  the  sacrament";  but  he  says  this 
where  he  treats  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  of  confirmation  and  of 
ordination.  Wherefore  it  does  not  seem  that  this  rule  is  to  be 
accepted  generally,  but  only  for  the  sacraments  of  baptism,  of  con- 
firmation and  of  ordination,  which  must  never  be  repeated,  because 
baptism,  confirmation  and  ordination  are  given  once  for  all  and  not 
more  frequently.  But  the  sacraments  of  the  altar,  and  of  penance 
and  of  marriage  are  evidently  often  repeated ;  for  the  sacrament  of 
the  body  is  often  received,  penance  is  frequently  done,  marriage  is 
repeatedly  contracted.  Why  therefore  cannot  unction  be  similarly 
repeated?  If  the  disease  does  not  return,  the  medicine  is  not  to  be 
repeated;  but  if  the  disease  cannot  be  checked,  why  ought  the  medi- 
cine be  prohibited?  Even  as  prayer  can  be  repeated,  so  it  seems 
unction  can  also  be  repeated;  for  James  in  that  passage  men- 
tions both,  and  both  work  together  to  bring  relief  of  body  and 
soul.  Why  therefore  do  some  persons  deny  that  unction  can  be 
repeated  on  one  who  is  sick,  in  order  to  obtain  again  the  health  of 
mind  and  body,  when  the  same  prayer  may  be  often  repeated  for 
the  same  infirmity  ?2 — But  some  wish  it  understood  that  the  whole 

^  Lib.  II.  contra  Epist.  Parmenian.  c.  13.  n.  28.    The  preceding  proposition 
is  also  from  Hugh,  II.  de  Sacram.  loc.  cit.  c.  3. 
2  Hugh,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XIV.  c.  3. 


</ 


DISTINCTION  XXIII 


223 


sacrament  should  not  be  repeated,  namely  everything  which  belongs 
to  the  sacrament,  saying  that  some  sacraments  can  be  often  received, 
but  some  not ;  and  that  those  which  are  often  received,  are  not  com- 
pletely repeated,  as  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  and  of  unction;  for 
although  they  are  often  received,  yet  because  the  same  host  is  not 
blessed  again,  nor  the  same  oil,  the  sacrament  is  not  repeated  with 
injury. — But  someone  will  say:  "in  this  sense  baptism  also  is  not 
repeated,  even  if  one  is  frequently  baptized,  since  the  same  water  is 
not  blessed  again."— "But  it  is  one  thing,"  they  say,  the  blessing 
of  the  water,  by  which  baptism  is  conferred,  another  the  blessing  of 
the  bread  and  oil.  For  baptism  can  be  celebrated  even  in  unblessed 
water,  because  the  blessing  is  only  for  reverence  and  decorum,  not 
for  the  virtue  of  the  sacrament.  But  the  body  of  Christ  cannot  be 
made,  except  of  consecrated  bread;  nor  can  unction  be  performed, 
except  with  oil  consecrated  by  the  bishop ;  and  therefore  this  sancti- 
fication  seems  to  be  a  part  of  the  virtue  of  the  sacrament.  In  mar- 
riage also,  a  man  is  blessed  only  once,  not  oftener. — "For  he  is 
blessed,"  as  Ambrose  says,^  "with  his  first  and  not  with  his  second 
wife.  If  therefore  when  you  say  that  a  sacrament  must  not  be 
repeated,  nor  injury  done  it,  you  apply  the  meaning  of  the  term  to 
the  sanctification  of  the  'thing'  by  which  the  sacrament  is  completed, 
the  rule  is  generally  true  of  every  sacrament.  But  if  you  apply  it 
to  the  receiving  of  the  'sacrament,'  it  is  true  of  some  that  they  are  not 
repeated  or  frequently  received,  but  it  is  not  true  of  others,  because 
they  are  frequently  received  like  this  sacrament  of  unction,  which  is 
often  repeated  in  almost  every  Church. 


^  In  I.  Cor.  7,  44.  (among  his  works),  and  I.  Tim.  5,  3. 


f 


Distinction  XXIV 


PART  I 


I.  Of  ecclesiastical  orders,  how  many  they  are. 

Now  we  come  to  the  consideration  of  holy  ordination.  There 
are  seven  grades  or  orders  of  spiritual  office,  as  is  clearly  taught  us 
in  the  words  of  the  holy  Fathers,  and  as  is  shown  by  the  example 
of  our  head,  that  is  Jesus  Christ,  who  performed  in  his  own  person 
the  duties  of  them  all,  and  left  the  same  orders  to  be  observed  in  his 
body  which  is  the  Church. 

II.  Why  there  are  seven. 

And  there  are  seven  on  account  of  the  sevenfold  grace  of  the 
holy  Spirit,  and  those  who  do  not  participate  in  this  grace,  enter  the 
ecclesiastical  grades  unworthily.  But  when  men  in  whose  minds  the 
seven-fold  grace  of  the  holy  Spirit  is  diffused,  enter  the  ecclesiastical 
orders,  they  are  believed  to  receive  a  fuller  grace  in  the  very  promo- 
tion to  the  spiritual  rank. 

III.  What  kind  of  men  are  to  he  taken  into  the  clergy. 

"And  such  clergy  are  to  be  elected  to  the  spiritual  ministry,  as 
can  worthily  perform  the  Lord's  sacraments.  For  it  is  better  for  the 
Lord  to  have  few  ministers  who  can  worthily  do  the  work  of  God, 
than  many  useless  ones,  who  bring  a  heavy  burden  on  him  who 
ordained  them."  ^  For  it  is  fitting  that  such  be  ministers  of  Christ 
as  are  adorned  with  the  sevenfold  grace  of  the  holy  Spirit;  from 
whose  doctrine  and  form  of  conversation  the  same  grace  may  be 
transmitted  to  others,  lest  they  trample  the  celestial  pearls  of  spirit- 
ual words  and  divine  ministrations  under  the  feet  of  a  vile  life.  Now 
in  the  sacrament  of  the  sevenfold  Spirit  there  are  seven  ecclesias- 
tical ranks,  that  is:  door-keepers,  readers,  exorcists,  acolytes,  sub- 
deacons,  deacons,  priests ;  but  all  are  called  clergy,  that  is,  chosen. 


*  Can.  Tales  ad  ministerium  (4.),  d.  23.  What  preceded  and  much  that 
follows  is  taken  from  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  Ill,  c.  5.  See  Matt. 
7,6. 

224 


^ 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


225 


I 


I 


/ 


I 


I 


\ 


IV.     Of  the  crown  and  tonsure. 

"For  the  crown  is  the  sign,  by  which  they  are  marked  for  a 
share  in  the  lot  of  the  divine  ministry.  The  crown  signifies  royal 
dignity,  because  to  serve  God  is  to  rule.  Wherefore  the  ministers  of 
the  Church  ought  to  be  kings,  so  that  they  may  rule  themselves  and 
others,  for  Peter  says  to  them :  'You  are  an  elect  race,  a  royal  priest- 
hood,' etc.  The  crown  of  their  heads  is  left  uncovered  from  above^ 
so  that  their  minds  may  be  shown  to  be  free  to  the  Lord,  as  they 
contemplate  'the  glory  of  God  with  face  uncovered.'  For  the  crown 
of  the  head  is  the  summit  of  the  mind ;  the  baring  of  the  head  is  the 
uncovering  of  the  mind."  ^  "For  the  cleric  ought  not  be  ignorant 
of  the  secrets  of  God.  And  their  hair  is  shaven  for  the  uncovering 
of  their  senses,  that  is,  of  the  eyes  and  ears,"  so  that  they  may  be 
taught  that  the  sins  which  grow  in  heart  and  deed  must  be  cut  off, 
lest  the  mind  be  hindered  from  hearing  and  understanding  the  word 
of  God,  for  the  observance  of  which  a  crown  shall  be  given  on  high. 
"Now  ecclesiastical  tonsure  seems  to  have  originated  with  the  Naz- 
arites,  who  first  saved  their  hair,  then  shaved  their  heads  for  con- 
tinence of  life,  and  placed  their  hair  in  the  fire  of  sacrifice.  Hence 
the  custom  became  established,  that  those  who  were  devoted  to  divine 
worship  like  the  Nazarites,  that  is,  holy  men,  should  be  seen  with 
shorn  hair,  as  was  said  to  Ezekiel :  *Thou  son  of  man,  take  a  sharp 
knife  and  cause  it  to  pass  upon  thy  head  and  beard."  In  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  also,  we  read  that  Priscilla  and  Aquila  did  this;  Paul 
also  and  certain  other  disciples  of  Christ  did  it."  ^  Therefore  men 
appointed  to  any  rank  are  rightly  called  clergy,  and  Isidore  explains^ 
their  names  and  the  meanings  of  their  names,  thus :  "We  believe  that 
clergy  and  cleric  are  so  called  from  the  fact  that  Matthew  was  elected 
by  lot,  and  he,  as  we  read  was  the  first  man  ordained  by  the  Apostles. 
For  'cleros'  in  Greek,  in  Latin  is  lot  or  inheritance.  Therefore  they 
are  called  'clergy'  because  they  are  of  the  lot  of  the  Lord,  or  because 
they  have  God  as  their  inheritance.     But  in  general  all  who  serve 


^  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  I.    See  I.  Peter  2,  9;  II.  Cor.  3,  18.    Following  passage, 
ibid.  c.  2. 

2  Ibid.  c.  3.    (Cf.  Isidore,  II.  de  Ecclesiast.  offic.  c.  4).    See  Numbers  6,  18; 
Ezek.  5,  i;  Acts  18,  18  and  21,  24. 

3  Lib.  VII.  Etymolog.  c.  12.  n.  i.  f.;  C.  Cleros  (i.),  d.  21;  cf.  Aug.,  Enarrat. 
in  Ps.  67.  n.  19. 


( 


226 


APPENDIX 


in  the  Church  are  called  clergy ;  their  grades  and  names  are :  door- 
keeper, reader,"  etc. 

PART  II 

V.  Of  the  door-keepers. 

Door-keepers  and  janitors  are  the  same  as  those  who  in  the 
Old  Testament^  were  elected  to  guard  the  temple,  so  that  no  unclean 
person  should  enter  it ;  and  they  are  called  door-keepers  because  they 
are  set  over  the  doors  of  the  temple.  For  they  keep  the  key,  and 
guard  all  things  within  and  without,  and  passing  judgment  upon  good 
and  evil,  they  receive  the  worthy  and  expel  the  unworthy.  Where- 
fore when  they  are  ordained  the  keys  of  the  Church  are  given  them 
by  the  bishop,  and  he  says  to  them :  "So  act  as  men  about  to  render 
an  account  to  God  for  the  things  which  are  unlocked  by  these  keys."  ^ 
— The  Lord  fulfilled  this  office  in  his  own  person  when  with  a 
scourge  of  cords,  he  cast  out  of  the  temple  those  that  bought  and 
sold.^  For  he  signified  that  he  was  a  door-keeper,  when  he  said: 
"I  am  the  door,  by  me  if  any  man  enter  in,  he  shall  be  saved,  and 
shall  come  in,  and  go  out,  and  shall  find  pasture."  * 

VI.  The  readers. 

The  second  is  the  grade  of  readers :  "The  readers  are  so  called 
from  reading  as  the  psalmists  from  singing  psalms.  For  they  deliver 
to  the  people  what  they  should  obey ;  they  sing  and  excite  the  souls 
of  their  hearers  to  compunction ;  although  some  readers  pronounce 
so  miserably,  that  they  drive  persons  to  mourning  and  lamentation. 
They  are  also  called  'proclaimers,*  for  they  proclaim  far  ahead,  and 
their  voice  is  so  clear,  that  it  reaches  even  the  ears  of  men  placed  far 
away."  ^  "But  it  is  the  duty  of  the  reader  to  read  the  lessons  and 
to  declare  to  the  people  what  the  Prophets  foretold,"  *  so  that  he 

*  I.  Paralis.  (Chron.)  23,  5.  What  follows  is  from  Isidore,  VII.  Etymolog. 
c.  12.  n.  32,  and  II.  de  Ecclesiast.  Offic.  c.  15;  C.  Cleros  §  19.  On  the  functions 
of  the  clergy,  see  Isidore,  Ep.  ad  Ludifredum,  or  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  6.  ff . ;  cf .  also 
Rabanus,  IV.  de  Universo,  c.  5. 

*  Can.  Ostiarius  (19.),  d.  23. 
» John  2,  15. 

*  John  10,  9. 

*  Isidore,  VII.  Etymolog.  c.  12.  n.  24;  C.  cit.  Cleros,  §  15;  Hugh,  loc.  cit. 
c.  7. 

•Can.  Perlectis  (i.),  d.  25.  §5. — Following  passage  from  Hugh,  loc.  cit.; 

C.  Lector  (18.),  d.  23. — See  Luke  4,  18;  Isaiah  58,  I. 


i 


, 


'    :l 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


227 


reads  in  Church,  by  virtue  of  his  office,  the  prophecies  and  lessons. 
"Wherefore  also,  in  the  sight  of  the  people,  the  volume  of  the  divine 
lessons  is  handed  him  by  the  bishop,  who  says:  Take  this,  and  be 
thou  a  reader  of  the  word  of  God ;  and  thou  wilt  have,  if  thou  faith- 
fully fulfill  this  office,  a  part  with  those  who  have  ministered  well  the 
word  of  God.'  He  who  is  promoted  to  this  rank,  ought  to  be 
instructed  in  the  knowledge  of  letters,  so  that  he  may  understand 
the  sense  of  the  words,  may  know  the  force  of  the  accents,  may  read 
distinctly,  lest  by  confusion  in  pronouncing  he  lead  astray  the  minds 
of  his  readers.  Let  him  note  what  is  to  be  read  as  a  statement,  what 
as  a  question,  and  where  a  pause  is  to  be  made  in  his  reading.  For 
when  these  points  are  not  observed,  they  interfere  with  understand- 
ing, and  provoke  some  to  laughter.  The  voice  of  the  reader  should 
aim  to  reach  both  the  ears  and  the  heart. — This  office  Christ  fulfilled 
when  in  the  midst  of  the  elders,  he  opened  the  book  of  Isaiah  and 
read  distinctly  and  intelligibly:  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,' 
etc.  Thereby  readers  may  perceive  that  they  who  announce  the 
word  of  God  to  others,  ought  to  shine  with  spiritual  grace.  The 
order  seems  to  have  taken  its  form  and  beginning  from  the  prophets ; 
for  it  was  said  to  them :  'Cry  aloud,  cease  not,  lift  up  your  voice  like  a 
trumpet.' 


>  >> 


VII.     Of  the  Exorcists. 

The  third  is  the  order  of  exorcists.  "Now  exorcists  in  Greek, 
are  called  adjurers  or  declaimers  in  Latin ;  for  they  invoke  the  name 
of  the  Lord  on  catechumens  and  on  those  who  have  an  unclean  spirit, 
adjuring  it  in  his  name  to  go  out  of  them."  ^  **It  is  the  duty  of  an 
exorcist  to  remember  his  exorcisms  and  to  lay  his  hands  on  demoni- 
acs and  catechumens  in  exorcizing,"  and  he  who  commands  the  un- 
clean spirits  ought  to  have  a  clean  spirit  and  ought  to  expel  the  evil 
spirit  from  his  heart,  when  he  expels  it  from  the  body  of  another,  lest 
the  medicine  which  he  makes  for  another  should  not  benefit  himself 
and  a  man  should  say  to  him:  'Thysician,  heal  thyself ."  ^     When 


s 


^Isidore,  loc.  cit.  n.  31;  C.  Cleros  (i.),  d.  21.  §18. — Following  passage, 
C.  Perlectis  (i.),  d.  25.  §  2;  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  8. 

*  Luke  4,  23.  The  following  passage  is  C.  Exorcista  (17.),  d.  23;  the  third, 
Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  8.  (See  Mark  7,  34;  Matt.  8,  16;  Lk.  8,  33);  fourth,  Gratian, 
introduction  to  d.  21.    (See  Matt.  12,  27.) 


228 


APPENDIX 


exorcists  are  ordained,  they  receive  the  book  of  exorcisms  from  the 
hand  of  the  bishop,  and  he  says  to  them :  'Take  this  and  have  power 
of  laying  hands  on  demoniacs  or  catechumens." — "The  Lord  per- 
formed this  office  when  he  touched  the  ears  and  tongue  of  the  deaf- 
mute  with  saliva  and  said:  'Epheta,'  that  is  'be  opened,'  teaching 
hereby  that  we  ought  to  open  spiritually  the  ears  of  the  hearts  of  men 
to  understand,  and  their  mouths  to  confess,  that  they  may  receive  the 
holy  Spirit  their  surety,  and  the  demon  may  be  cast  out.  Christ 
also  fulfilled  this  office  when  he  healed  many  demoniacs.  'This 
order  seems  to  have  descended  from  Solomon,  who  found  a  way 
of  exorcizing,  by  which  demons  were  adjured  and  expelled  from 
the  bodies  which  they  possessed;  men  dedicated  to  this  office  are 
called  exorcists.  Christ  says  of  them  in  the  Gospel:  *If  I  cast  out 
demons  by  Beelzebub,  by  whom  do  your  sons,'  that  is,  the  exorcists^ 
'cast  them  out?'" 


Ifl 


VIII.     Of  the  acolytes. 

In  the  fourth  place  come  the  acolytes.  *'But  acolytes  in  Greek, 
are  called  in  Latin  candle-bearers,  from  the  carrying  of  candles  when 
the  Gospel  is  to  be  read  or  the  sacrifice  to  be  oflFered.  For  then  the 
lights  are  lighted,  and  carried  by  them ;  not  to  drive  away  the  dark- 
ness, because  the  sun  at  that  time  is  bright,  but  to  show  a  sign  of 
joy;  so  that  under  the  type  of  corporeal  light,  the  light  might  be  dis- 
played, of  which  it  is  said:  *He  was  the  true  light,  which  lighteth 
every  man  coming  into  this  world.' "  ^  "To  the  acolyte  falls  the 
preparation  of  the  lights  in  the  sacristy;  he  carries  the  candle,  he 
prepares  for  the  sub-deacons  the  cruet  with  the  wine  and  the  water 
mixed,  for  the  Eucharist."  ''When  acolytes  are  ordained,  while  they 
are  instructed  by  the  bishop  how  they  ought  to  act  in  their  office, 
they  receive  from  the  archdeacon  a  candlestick  with  a  candle,  and  an 
empty  cruet. — The  Lord  testified  that  he  held  this  office  when  he 
said :  'I  am  the  light  of  the  world ;  whoever  follows  me  shall  not  walk 
in  darkness.'"  Those  who  in  the  Old  Testament2  arranged  the 
lamps  in  the  candlestick  and  lighted  them  with  celestial  fire  to  illu- 
minate the  northern  darkness,  possessed  the  form  of  this  office. 


^  Isidore,  loc.  cit.  n.  29;  C.  cit.  Cleros,  §  17.    See  John  i,  9.    Following  pas- 
sage is  C.  Perlectis,  supra  cit.,  §  3;  third  is  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  9;  see  John  8,  12. 
*  Exod.  25,  6;  Levit.  6,  12. 


w 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


229 


IX.     Of  the  sub-deacons. 

The  fifth  is  the  order  of  sub-deacons.  "In  Greek  they  are  called 
hypodiacones,  whom  we  call  sub-deacons ;  they  are  so  called,  because 
they  are  subordinate  to  the  commands  and  duties  of  the  Levites.  For 
they  receive  in  the  temple  the  oblations  of  the  faithful  and  bring 
them  to  the  Levites  to  be  placed  on  the  altars.  They  were  called 
among  the  Hebrews  the  Nathinaei,"  "that  is,  those  who  serve  the 
Lord  in  humility."  ^  "It  is  the  duty  of  a  sub-deacon  to  bring  the 
chalice  and  paten  to  the  altar  of  Christ,  and  to  hand  them  to  the 
Levites  and  to  minister  to  them,  and  also  to  hold  the  cruet  and  the 
basin  and  the  napkin  for  the  bishop  and  the  priests  and  the  Levites 
and  to  oflFer  them  water  to  wash  their  hands  before  the  altar."  * 
The  law  of  continence  is  imposed  on  them,  because  they  approach 
the  altar,  and  carry  the  vessels  with  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ; 
wherefore  they  ought  to  fulfill  the  saying  of  Isaiah:  "Be  ye  clean 
who  bear  the  vessels  of  the  Lord."  ^  "It  is  also  their  duty  to  place 
as  much  of  the  oblations  on  the  altar  as  may  suffice  for  the  people, 
and  to  wash  the  corporal-cloths  and  the  palls  and  altar-cloths." 
"When  they  are  ordained,  they  receive  from  the  hand  of  the  bishop 
a  paten  and  empty  chalice,  and  from  the  archdeacon  a  cruet  with  a 
basin  and  a  napkin. — Christ  held  this  office,  when  he  girded  himself 
with  a  towel  and  pouring  water  into  a  basin,  washed  the  feet  of  the 
disciples,  and  wiped  them  with  a  towel." 

X*     Of  the  deacons. 

"The  order  of  deacons  holds  the  sixth  place  on  account  of  the 
perfection  of  the  number  six.  This  order  in  the  old  Testament 
received  or  took  its  name  from  the  tribe  of  Levi ;  for  they  are  also 
called  Levites.  For  the  Lord  commanded  Moses,  that  after  the 
ordination  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  the  tribe  of  Levi  should  straight- 
way be  ordained  and  consecrated  to  the  Lord  for  the  ministry  of 
the  divine  worship,  and  that  it  should  serve  for  Israel  in  the  presence 
of  Aaron  and  his  sons  in  the  tabernacle,  and  that  they  should  bear 


*  Isidore,  loc.  cit.  n.  23;  C.  Cleros,  §  14;  but  the  last  words  are  from  Hugh, 
loc.  cit.  c.  10.    (See  Acts  20,  19,  and  II.  Esdras.  3.  26.) 

*  Isidore,  Ep.  cit.  ad  Ludifredum;  C.  cit.  Perlectis^  §  6. 

'  Isaiah  52,  11. — The  following  passage  is  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  10,  and  C.  Sub- 
diaconus  (15.),  d.  23.    See  John  13,  5. 


230 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


231 


\l 


the  ark  and  the  tabernacle  and  all  its  vessels  and  should  sleep  round 
about  the  tabernacle,  and  when  the  tabernacle  must  be  moved  they 
should  take  it  down  and  set  it  up  again.    They  were  commanded  to 
serve  in  the  tabernacle  from  twenty  years  of  age  and  upward  and 
this  rule  was  followed  by  the  holy  Fathers  under  the  New  Testament, 
because  that  age  is  robust  to  bear  burdens."  ^    *The  Levites  there- 
fore are  called   from  the  name  of  their  founder;  for  the  Levites 
sprang  from  Levi,  and  by  them  the  mysteries  of  the  mystic  sacrament 
were  performed  in  the  temple.    They  are  called  diaconi  in  Greek  and 
in  Latin  ministers,  because,  as  consecration  is  a  function  of  the  priest, 
so  the  service  of  the  mystery  is  that  of  the  deacon."  2    "it  is  the  duty 
of  a  deacon  to  assist  the  priests,  and  to  minister  in  all  the  acts  which 
are  performed  in  the  sacraments  of  Christ,  that  is,  in  baptism,  in 
chrism,  with  the  paten  and  chalice,  and  also  carry  the  oblations 
and  place  them  on  the  altar,  also  to  arrange  the  table  of  the  Lord 
and  to  cover  it,  to  carry  the  cross,  and  to  read  the  Gospel  and  Epistle 
to  the  people.    For  as  the  readers  are  commanded  to  read  the  Old 
Testament,  so  the  deacons  to  read  the  New.    The  office  of  the  prayers 
is  also  his  duty,  and  the  recitation  of  the  names  of  catechumens. 
He  admonishes  them  to  give  ear  to  the  Lord,  he  gives  the  peace  and 
he  announces  it."     And  the  statute  of  Moses   for  this  order  is 
also  represented  under  the  New  Testament,  when  a  stole  is  laid 
on  the  left  shoulder  of  a  deacon,  and  his  chasuble  is  folded  upon 
the  days  of  fasting ;  because  whatever  toil  and  endurance  are  suffered 
in  this  life,  are,  as  it  were,  borne  on  the  left  side,  while  on  the  right, 
that  is,  in  eternity,  rest  is  found.    This  order  was  celebrated  by  the 
Apostles,  when,  as  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles^,  they  chose 
'seven  men  full  of  the  holy  Spirit'  for  the  office,  and  when  prayers 
were  offered,  they  laid  hands  on  them.    Wherefore  also  the  custom 
became   established   that   in   every   mother   Church   seven   deacons 
should  stand  around  the  altar  of  Christ  like  seven  columns.    They 
are  the  seven  angels  blowing  trumpets  in  the  Apocalypse,  who  ought 
to  be  men  like  those  the  Apostle  described  when  he  wrote  to  Tim- 


»  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  II;  cf.  Isidore,  II.  de  Ecclesiast.  Officiis,  c.  8;  see  Num- 
bers 3,  6.  10  and  4,  5;  8,  24. 

« Isidore,  VII.  Etymolog.  c.  12.  n.  22;  C.  Cleros,  §  13.  The  foUowing  place 
is  C.  PerUctis,  op.  cit.  §  7;  and  what  follows  is  taken  from  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  li. 

»  Acts  6,  3.— For  the  following  cf.  C.  Episcopus  Deo  (59.),  de  Cons.  d.  i. 


I 


' 


othy.i  "When  they  are  ordained,  the  bishop  alone  lays  hands  on  them, 
because  they  are  devoted  to  the  ministry."  He  places  the  orarium, 
that  is,  the  stole,  on  the  left  shoulder,  that  by  this  they  may  know 
that  they  have  received  the  *gentle  yoke  of  the  Lord,'^  by  which  they 
may  make  subject  to  the  fear  of  God  the  things  of  the  left  side. 
They  receive  also  the  text  of  the  Gospel  that  they  may  know  that 
they  are  heralds  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Likewise  before  they 
are  ordained,  they  should  be  tried,  as  the  Apostle  teaches, ^  and  if 
they  have  no  crime,  they  may  minister. — ''Christ  performed  this 
office  when  after  the  Feast  he  distributed  the  sacrament  of  his  flesh 
and  blood  to  the  disciples,  and  when  he  roused  the  sleeping  disciples 
to  prayer,  saying:  'Watch  and  pray,  that  ye  enter  not  into  tempta- 
tion.^ " 

XI.     Of  presbyters. 

The  seventh  order  is  that  of  presbyters.  "Presbyter  in  Greek 
is  senior  in  Latin.  They  are  called  presbyters  not  only  because  of 
their  years  or  advanced  age,  but  on  account  of  the  honor  and  dignity 
which  they  receive'*  * ;  "for  they  ought  to  excel  among  the  people 
by  the  prudence  of  their  ways  and  the  maturity  of  their  conversa- 
tion, as  it  is  written:  'Old  age  is  venerable,  not  for  its  length  nor 
for  the  number  of  years  computed.  For  it  is  the  thoughts  of  a  man 
that  are  hoary,  and  an  immaculate  life  is  old  age.'  "  "Presbyters 
are  also  called  priests,  because  they  give  what  is  sacred ;  yet,  although 
they  are  priests,  they  have  not  the  crown  of  the  pontificate  as 
bishops  have,  because  they  do  not  sign  the  forehead  with  the  chrism 
nor  give  the  Paraclete,  which  functions  are  shown  by  a  reading  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  to  belong  to  bishops  only."  Wherefore  also 
among  men  of  old  times  bishops  and  presbyters  were  the  same, 
because  it  is  the  name  of  a  dignity,  not  of  an  age.    "The  name  priest 


*  L  Tim.  3,  8;  above,  see  Apoc.  (Rev.)  8,  2.  Following  passage,  C.  Diaconus 
(II.),  d.  23. 

*  Matt.  II,  30. 

*  I.  Tim.  3,  10.  Following  passage  from  Hugh,  op.  cit. ;  see  Matt.  26,  26, 
and  Matt.  26,  41. 

*  Isidore,  VII.  Etymolog.  c.  12.  n.  20;  C.  Cleros^  §  12;  the  following  passage 
is  Hugh,  ibid.  c.  12;  see  Wisdom  4,  8;  third  is  Isidore  and  canon,  as  above;  see 
Acts  8,  14. 


f 


V- 


232 


APPENDIX 


-  --4 


(sacerdos)  is  composed  from  the  Greek  and  the  Latin,  that  is  sacrum 
dans,  or  sacer  dux.     For  as  a  king   (rex)   is  called   from  ruHng 
(regendo),  so  a  priest  from  sanctifying  (sanctificando)  ;  for  he  con- 
secrates and  sanctifies.!     A  priest  is  also  called  antistes  from  the 
fact  that  he  stands  before  {ante  stat),  for  he  is  first  in  the  order  of 
the  Church."    ''Moreover  the  duty  of  a  presbyter  is  to  perform  the 
sacrament  oi  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  on  the  altar  of  God, 
to  say  prayers  and  to  bless  the  gifts  of  God";  when  he  is  ordained 
he  has  his  hands  anointed,  that  he  may  know  he  has  received  the 
grace  of  consecrating  and  that  he  ought  to  extend  the  deeds  of 
charity  to  all.    He  also  receives  the  stole  which  falls  on  both  sides, 
because  he  ought  to  be  protected  by  the  arms  of  justice  against  both 
adversity  and  prosperity.     He  also  receives  the  chalice  with  the 
wine  and  the  paten  with  the  host,  that  he  may  thereby  know  he 
receives  the  power  of  offering  ''sacrifices  acceptable  to  God."  2 — 
This  order  had  its  origin  with  the  sons  of  Aaron.    For  God  instituted 
high-priests  and  lesser  priests  through  Moses,  who  at  God's  com- 
mand anointed  Aaron  to  be  high-priest  and  his  sons  lesser  priests. 
Christ  also  first  "chose  twelve  disciples,  whom  he  likewise  called 
Apostles";  whose  place  is  now  occupied  by  the  greater  bishops  in 
the  Church.     Next  he  appointed  also  seventy-two  other  disciples, 
whose  place  in  the  Church  is  filled  by  the  presbyters.    But  one  among 
the  apostles  became  chief,  Peter,  whose  vicar  and  successor  is  the 
Supreme   Pontiflf,  wherefore  he  is  called  "apostolic"  and   is  also 
known  as  Pope  (Papa),  that  is,  father  of  fathers.    And  the  Apostle, 
when  he  wrote  to  Timothy,  showed  what  manner  of  man  ought  to 
be  elected  presbyter;  for  there  he  means  presbyter  when  he  uses 
the  name  of  "bishop."~And  Christ  performed  this  office  when  he 
"oflFered  himself  on  the  altar  of  the  cross."     When  he  was  both 
priest  and  victim,  and  when  after  supper  he  changed  the  bread  and 
wine    into   his   own   body   and    blood. — Behold,    we   have    spoken 
briefly  of  the  seven  grades  of  the  Church,  and  have  mentioned  what 
the  duty  of  each  is. 


\ 


v^ 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


233 


*Rabanus,  IV.  de  Univero.      Following  passage  is  from  C.  Perlectis,  op. 
cit.  §  8;  the  rest  is  from  Hugh,  op.  cit.  c.  12. 

«  Numbers  5,  8,  next  Exod.  29,  5;  Luke  6.  13;  10.  i;  Matt.  16.  18;  I.  Tim. 
3,  2;  Heb.  ID,  II. 


I  ' 


XII.  Which  are  called  holy  orders. 

And  although  all  orders  are  spiritual  and  holy,  yet  the  canons 
rightly  ordain  that  only  two  should  be  called  holy  orders,  namely 
the  diaconate  and  the  presbyterate ;  because  "the  primitive  church 
is  said  to  have  had  only  these,"  ^  and  we  have  the  command  of  the 
Apostle  for  these  only.  "For  the  Apostle  ordained  bishops  and 
presbyters  in  each  city" ;  we  read  also  that  Levites  were  ordained  by 
the  Apostles,  of  whom  the  greatest  was  the  blessed  Stephen;  but  the 
Church  established  subdeacons  and  acolytes  for  herself  as  time 
went  on. 

XIII.  Why  it  is  called  order. 

Now  if  we  are  asked  w^hat  that  is  which  we  here  call  order ;  we 
can  say  rightly  that  it  is  a  sign,  that  is,  something  sacred,  by  which 
spiritual  power  and  office  are  delivered  to  one  ordained.  Therefore 
the  spiritual  marking  when  the  bestowal  of  power  occurs,  is  called 
the  order  or  grade.  And  these  orders  are  called  sacraments,  because 
in  the  reception  of  them,  a  sacred  thing,  that  is,  grace  is  received, 
which  is  symbolized  by  the  procedure  at  that  time. 

XIV.  Of  the  names  of  the  dignities  or  offices. 

And  there  are  other  names,  not  of  orders,  but  of  dignities  or  of 
offices.    Bishop  is  the  name  both  of  a  dignity  and  of  an  office. 

XV.  Of  the  bishop, 

"Now  the  word  episcopate  comes  from  the  fact  that  he  who  is 
made  bishop  superintends,  that  is,  has  the  care  of  those  under  him. 
For  scopein  in  Greek  is  to  superintend  (intendere)  in  Latin ;  episcopi 
in  Greek  are  in  Latin  overseers  (speculatores).  For  the  overseer 
(spectdator)  is  placed  over  the  Church,  and  is  so  called  from  the  fact 
that  he  oversees  and  watches  the  customs  and  life  of  the  people 
under  him."  2 

XVI.  Of  the  bishop. 

"The  bishop  is  the  head  of  the  priests,  as  it  were  a  way  for 

»  Can.  Nullus  in  episcopum  (4.),  d.  60.    See  I.  Tim.  op.  cit.  and  Acts  6,  5. 
What  follows,  Gratian,  in  the  beginning  of  d.  21. 
2  Isidore,  op.  cit.  n.  11;  C.  Cleros,  §  7. 


234 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXIV 


235 


those  who  follow;  and  he  is  also  called  the  'high-priest.'  For  he 
makes  the  Levites  and  priests,  he  assigns  all  the  ecclesiastical 
orders."  ^ 

XVII.  Of  the  four-fold  order  of  bishops. 

"And  the  order  of  bishops  is  four-fold,  that  is,  patriarchs,  arch- 
bishops, metropolitans  and  bishops.  Patriareha  in  Greek  means  the 
chief  of  the  fathers,  because  the  patriarch  holds  the  first,  that  is  the 
apostolic  place,  like  the  Roman,  the  Antiochian,  the  Alexandrian"  ^ ; 
but  the  chief  of  all  is  the  Roman.  *'The  archbishop  is  the  head  of 
the  bishops;  for  archos  in  Greek  is  head  (prineeps)  in  Latin.  But 
metropoHtans  are  so  called  from  the  importance  of  their  cities;  for 
they  preside  over  single  provinces;  and  the  other  priests  are  subject 
to  their  authority  and  doctrine.  For  the  care  of  the  whole  province 
is  committed  to  the  bishops  themselves.  And  all  the  orders  desig- 
nated above  are  called  bishops." — Note,  that  evidently  primates  were 
meant  above  by  the  name  archbishops,  and  by  metropolitans,  those 
whom  we  now  call  archbishops.  "Also  the  distinction  between  these 
seems  to  have  been  introduced  by  Gentiles  who  called  some  of  their 
flamens  simply  flamens,  other  archflamens,  others  chief -flamens."  ^ 
"For  the  priests  of  the  Gentiles  were  called  flamens,  because  they 
wore  on  their  heads  a  felt  cap,  on  which  there  was  a  short  rod,  with 
wool  upon  it,  and  when  they  could  not  wear  it  for  the  heat,  they 
bound  a  thread  only  about  their  heads.  For  it  was  wrong  for  them 
to  take  their  places  with  bare  heads.  Wherefore  they  are  called 
flamens  or  filamines  from  the  thread  (fils)  which  they  wore.  But 
on  feast-days  they  laid  aside  the  thread  and  assumed  the  cap  for  the 
dignity  of  the  priesthood. 

XVIII.  Of  the  prophet. 

The  seers  (vates)  were  so  called  from  their  strength  of  mind 
(vi  mentis),  and  the  significance  of  their  name  is  manifold;  for  it 
signifies  sometimes  priest,  sometimes  prophet,  sometimes  poet. 


^  Locis  citt. 

*  Can.  cit.  Cleros,  §  i.  Following  passage,  Isidore,  loc.  cit.  n.  10,  and  C. 
cit.  §  6. 

3  Gratian,  introduction  to  d.  21.  Following  passage  is  Isidore,  loc.  cit. 
n.  18;  C.  Cleros,  §  11.;  and  from  Isidore,  loc.  cit.  n.  15,  and  C.  cit.  §  9.  and  16, 
much  of  what  follows  in  the  succeeding  chapters,  is  taken. 


XIX.     Of  the  cantor. 

But  the  cantor  is  so  called,  because  he  modulates  his  voice  in 
song  (cantu).  Of  cantors  there  are  two  kinds:  precentor  and  suc- 
centor;  precentor,  the  one  who  begins  the  chant;  the  succentor  the 
one  who  responds  by  singing  after  him;  and  the  concentor  is  so 
called,  because  he  accompanies  another.  But  he  who  does  not 
accompany  another  nor  sing  in  concert,  will  not  be  a  concentor. 

Now  that  these  matters  "have  been  briefly  discussed,  the  min- 
isters of  Christ  must  be  warned  that  just  so  far  as  they  excel  in  the 
dignity  of  their  order,  should  they  excel  in  sanctity  of  life,  so  that  the 
people  committed  to  them,  taught  by  their  disciplines,  may  obey  them 
gratefully,  and  may  make  progress  from  day  to  day  through  imita- 
tion of  them"^  from  whom  they  receive  the  divine  sacraments,  and 
hear  the  solemn  words  of  the  masses. — Now  "Mass"  (Missa)  is  so 
called,  either  because  the  victim  is  sent  (missa),  who  is  com- 
memorated in  this  office,  wherefore  we  say :  "Go,  it  is  sent,"  that  is, 
follow  the  victim  which  is  sent  to  heaven,  striving  after  it ;  or  because 
"the  heavenly  messenger  (missus)  comes"  to  consecrate  the  Lord's 
body,  and  by  him  the  victim  is  borne  to  the  heavenly  altar,  wherefore 
also  we  say:  "It  is  sent"  2  (Missa  est.) 


'  Hugh,  loc.  cit.  c.  12. 

2  Cf.  above  d.  XIII.  c.  i.  about  the  middle. 


n 


// 


DISTINCTION  XXV 


237 


Distinction  XXV 

I.     Of  persons  ordained  by  heretics. 

We  are  also  often  asked  whether  heretics,  cut  off  and  condemned 
by  the  Church,  can  give  holy  orders,  and  whether  persons  ordained 
by  them  ought  to  be  reordained  when  they  return  to  the  unity 
of  the  Church. — The  words  of  the  doctors,  which  seem  to  disagree 
entirely,  make  this  problem  obscure  and  almost  insoluble. — For  some 
appear  to  teach  that  heretics  cannot  give  holy  orders,  and  that  those 
who  seem  to  be  ordained  by  them  do  not  receive  grace.  For  Innocent 
says^ :  *'It  does  not  seem  that  the  Arian  clergy  should  be  received 
with  the  dignity  of  any  priesthood  or  ministry,"  and  to  them  he 
allows  only  baptism,  which  is  received  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  holy  Spirit.  He  says  also  that  "they  cannot 
give  the  holy  Spirit,  whom  they  have  lost" ;  and  that  "those  ordained 
by  heretics  have  their  heads  wounded ;  and  he  who  has  lost  an  honor 
cannot  bestow  the  honor,  nor  can  another  receive  anything,  since 
there  was  nothing  in  the  giver  which  he  could  receive."  He  taught 
also  that  "only  lay  communion  should  be  imparted,  with  the  laying 
on  of  hands,  to  persons  who  come  over  from  the  heretics,  and  that 
no  one  of  them  should  receive  even  the  smallest  clerical  honor." 
Gregory^  also  says  that  the  consecration  of  the  Arians  is  sacrile- 
gious, when  communion  is  received  from  their  hands.  Cyprian^  also 
says  that  all  that  heretics  do  is  carnal  and  worthless  and  sacrilegious, 
and  their  "altars  are  false  and  unlawful,  their  priesthoods  and  sacri- 
fices sacrilegious,"  and  that  "like  apes,  which,  since  they  are  not  men, 
imitate  the  human  form,  they  claim  the  appearance  and  authority  of 
the  catholic  Church  for  themselves,  although  they  are  not  in  the 
Church" ;  and  since  they  are  sacrilegious,  they  administer  their  priest- 


*  Can.  Arianos  (73.),  C.  i.  q.  i.  Following  passage  is  C.  Qui  perfectionem 
(17.),  ibid.;  third,  C.  Ventum  est  (18.),  ibid.;  fourth,  ibid.  §  2. 

*Lib.  III.  Dialog,  c.  31;  C.  Superveniente  (72.),  ibid. 

*  Ep.  ad  Magnum  de  baptizandis  Novatianis,  n.  i ;  and  Gratian  on  C. 
Manus  impositio  (74.),  ibid,  and  next  Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  lubaianum  (de  haereticis 
baptizand.)  n.  2;  both  in  C.  Si  quis^  inquit  (70.),  ibid.  For  the  following,  cf. 
Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  Magnum,  n.  9.  ff. 

236 


'  s  ' 


hood  and  erect  their  altar,  although  the  oblation  cannot  be  sacrificed 
there,  for  the  holy  Spirit  is  not  present ;  and  the  Lord  does  not  bene- 
fit anyone  through  the  prayers  and  petitions  of  a  person  who  has 
dishonored  the  Lord  himself.  Jerome^  also  asserts  that  "everything 
which  is  offered  by  heretics  is  defiled  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  be- 
cause although  the  things  seem  to  be  holy  in  appearance,  yet  because 
they  are  touched  by  someone  who  is  polluted,  they  are  all  polluted." 
The  same :  "God  hates  the  sacrifices  of  heretics  and  casts  them  away 
from  him ;  and  as  often  as  heretics  are  gathered  together  in  his  name, 
he  detests  their  noisomeness,  and  closes  his  nostrils."  The  same: 
"They  offer  sacrilegious  bread,"  etc.  Leo  also^  declares  that,  "out- 
side the  Church  there  are  no  valid  priesthoods,  nor  are  there  true 
sacrifices."  He  also  says:  "The  light  of  all  sacrifices  was  extin- 
guished in  the  Alexandrian  see  by  cruel  madness:  the  oblation  of 
the  sacrifice  was  interrupted,  the  sanctification  of  the  chrism  failed, 
and  all  the  mysteries  withdrew  themselves  from  the  murderous  hands 
of  the  impious." — By  these  and  other  testimonies  it  seems  estab- 
lished that  the  ecclesiastical  sacraments,  especially  those  of  the  body 
and  blood,  of  ordination  and  confirmation,  cannot  be  administered 
by  heretics. 

But  on  the  contrary  others  seem  to  think  that  holy  orders  can 
be  given  by  heretics  even  when  cut  off  from  the  Church,  as  can  bap- 
tism, and  that  those  who,  having  been  ordained  and  baptized  by 
heretics  return  to  the  Church  from  them,  need  not  be  again  ordained 
or  baptized.  Wherefore  Augustine^  :  "What  some  say  of  condemned 
heretics :  that  one  who  leaves  the  Church  does  not  lose  the  baptism 
which  he  has  received  but  loses  the  power  of  giving  what  he  has 
received ;  seems  in  many  ways  to  be  said  foolishly :  first,  because  no 
reason  is  shown  why  he  who  cannot  lose  his  baptism  can  lose  the 
power  of  giving  it.  For  both  are  sacraments,  and  both  are  bestowed 
upon  a  man  with  consecration :  the  one  when  he  is  baptized,  the  other 
when  he  is  ordained.  Therefore  neither  sacrament  can  be  repeated 
in  the  catholic  Church.     For  when  some  who  have  been  officers 


*  Comment,  in  Aggaeum  2,  15;  C.  Sic  populus  (61.),  ibid.;  following  pas- 
sage, in  Amos  5,  22;  C.  Odit  Deus  (62.),  ibid.;  third,  in  Oseam  6,  7;  C.  Illi  offerunt 
(63.),  ibid. 

*  Ep.  80.  (alias  60.)  ad  Anatolium,  c.  2;  C.  In  Ecclesia  (68.),  ibid.;  following 
passage,  Ep.  156.  (alias  125.)  ad  Leonem,  c.  5;  C.  Manifestum  est  (69.),  ibid. 

3  Lib.  II.  contra  epist.  Parmeniani,  c.  13.  n.  28;  C.  Quod  quidam  (97.),  ibid. 


SI 


^38 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXV 


239 


X 


in  a  sect  come  into  the  Church  for  the  good  of  peace,  and  the 
correction  of  the  error  of  schism  is  corrected,  they  are  received, 
and  even  if  it  seem  needful  that  they  should  fill  the  same  office 
which  they  were  administering  before ;  they  are  not  to  be  ordained 
again;  but  as  their  baptism,  so  their  ordination  has  remained 
unimpaired  for  the  fault  was  in  their  cutting  off  from  the  Church, 
and  this  is  corrected  by  the  unity  of  peace,  not  in  the  sacra- 
ments, which,  wherever  they  are,  are  the  same.  And  when  it  seems 
expedient  for  the  Church  itself,  that  the  officers  of  the  heretics  who 
come  into  the  catholic  society,  should  not  there  exercise  their  honors ; 
still  the  actual  sacraments  of  ordination  are  not  taken  from  them,  but 
remain  with  them ;  therefore  hands  are  not  laid  on  them,  lest  injury 
should  be  done ;  not  to  the  man,  but  to  the  sacrament  itself.  But  as 
in  baptism  there  is  a  right  which  can  be  given  by  them,  so  in  ordina- 
tion there  is  a  right  to  give,  both  to  be  sure  to  their  own  destruction. 
But  it  is  one  thing  not  to  have  a  right,  another  to  have  it  unto  destruc- 
tion, and  still  another  unto  salvation."  The  same' :  "As  for  those 
who  are  separated  from  the  unity  of  the  Church,  there  is  now  no 
question  but  that  they  have  and  can  give ;  but  they  have  unto  destruc- 
tion, because  they  are  outside  the  'bond  of  peace.'  Injury  must  not 
be  done  to  either  sacrament.  Just  as  he  does  not  have  it  rightly,  if 
he  withdraws  from  unity,  but  yet  he  has  it,  and  therefore  when  he 
returns  into  unity  it  is  not  given  to  him  again,  so  also  he  does  not 
perform  it  rightly  if  he  withdraws  from  unity  and  yet  he  performs 
it;  and  therefore  it  is  not  repeated  for  one,  who  receives  it  from  him, 
when  he  comes  into  the  unity  of  the  Church."  The  same :  "It  is  one 
thing  not  to  have  something,  it  is  another  no^  to  have  it  rightly  or 
to  exercise  it  unlawfully.  But  not  on  that  account  are  they  not  sacra- 
ments of  Christ  and  the  Church,  because  not  only  heretics,  but  also 
all  the  impious,  use  them  unlawfully;  but  they  must  be  corrected 
and  punished,  and  the  sacraments  must  be  recognized  and  venerated." 
Also  Gregory^:  "As  to  your  saying  that  he  who  has  been  ordained 
should  be  ordained  again,  it  is  certainly  ridiculous.  For  as  one  who 
is  once  baptized  ought  not  be  baptized  again,  so  he  who  is  once  con- 
secrated, cannot  be  consecrated  again  to  the  same  order." — From 

*  Ibid.,  and  C.  cit.  §  6.  See  Eph.  4,  3. — Following  passage  from  III.  de 
Baptismo  contra  Donatist.  c.  10.  n.  13. 

2  Lib.  II.  Registr.  indict.  10,  epist.  46  (alias  22.)  ad  loan,  episc.  Ravennat.; 
C.  Sicut  semel  (i.),  d.  68. 


\ 


i  y 


these  and  other  authorities  it  seems  that  the  sacraments  of  Christ 
with  the  power  of  performing  them,  remain  with  all  the  impious  and 
even  with  heretics  who  are  cut  off  and  condemned ;  for  they  are  able 
to  perform  them,  but  to  their  own  destruction,  and  those  on  whom 
they  bestow  them  must  not  be  ordained  again.  All  of  this  seems 
to  contradict  the  foregoing  opinions  on  the  other  side. 

Now  some  explain  these  statements  thus.  For  they  say  that 
heretics,  who  leave  the  Church  after  having  received  sacerdotal  or 
episcopal  unction,  certainly  retain  the  power  of  giving  baptism,  but 
have  not  the  ability  to  impart  holy  Orders  or  to  consecrate  the 
Lord's  body,  after  they  are  cut  off  and  condemned  by  the  Churchy, 
just  as  a  degraded  bishop  has  not  the  power  of  bestowing  holy 
Orders,  yet  he  does  not  lose  the  ability  to  baptize.  But  as  to  the  say- 
ing of  Augustine,  they  understand  it  of  heretics,  who  are  cut  off,, 
not  by  the  sentence  of  the  Church,  but  by  the  perversity  of  their 
understanding,  from  the  truth  of  faith  and  the  unity  of  doctrine; 
who,  although  they  are  in  such  condition  yet  have  the  power  of 
ordination  and  consecration.  And  persons  who  are  ordained  by  them 
before  their  manifest  schism  even  if  later  they  openly  leave  with 
them  and  are  condemned  by  the  sentence  of  the  Church,  yet  if  they 
return  must  not  be  ordained  again.  And  they  say  we  can  understand 
in  this  way,  whatever  we  read  to  the  effect  that  persons  ordained 
by  heretics  can  minister,  if  they  have  observed  their  orders,  and  miist 
not  be  ordained  again.  But  they  assert  that  after  the  persons  are 
cut  off  and  condemned  by  the  judgment  of  the  Church  the  power  of 
ordaining  and  consecrating  is  taken  from  them,  as  from  the  degraded, 
or  excommunicated. — But  others  say  that  sacraments  celebrated 
according  to  the  rite  of  the  Church,  by  heretics  and  persons  cut  off 
from  unity,  are  true  and  valid,  because  when  they  left  the  Churcb 
they  did  not  lose  the  power  of  ordaining  and  consecrating ;  and  per- 
sons who  are  thus  ordained  by  heretics,  when  they  return,  must  not 
be  ordained  again.  But  the  sacraments  which  are  performed  by 
heretics  otherwise  than  as  they  are  performed  in  the  Church,  are 
false  and  invalid ;  and  persons  who  seem  to  be  ordained  by  them,  do 
not  receive  a  gift  but  a  wound.  So  following  this  difference  of 
opinion,  the  doctors  speak  variously  of  these  matters.  But  some 
say*  that  the  same  sacraments  can  be  celebrated  by  heretics  cut  off 

*  Cf.  Gratian,  on  C.  cit.  Quod  quidam,  §  5,  7. 


/ 


240 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXV 


241 


from  the  Church,  as  by  Catholics,  if  the  forms  of  the  church  are  pre- 
served by  them ;  and  the  sacraments  celebrated  by  them  are  true  and 
valid  in  themselves,  but  they  are  false  and  invalid  in  their  effects, 
both  upon  those  who  wickedly  perform  them  and  upon  those  who 
wickedly  receive  them,  and  therefore  invalid  and  false,  because  what 
they  promise  and  are  believed  to  confer,  they  do  not  confer;  more- 
over they  are  said  to  be  condemned,  because  for  those  who  unlaw- 
fully give  and  receive  them,  they  are  unto  judgment;  they  are  also 
called  polluted,  not  so  much  for  themselves,  as  on  account  of  the 
unworthy  performance  of  them  by  the  heretics.  Therefore  Gregory 
calls  the  communion  of  Arius  execration  and  Innocent  the  ordina- 
tion of  Bonosius  damnation;  not  because  they  are  so  in  them- 
selves, but  because  they  make  those,  who  wickedly  give  or  receive 
them,  liable  to  damnation,  as  Jerome  also  calls  their  sacrifices 
the  bread  of  lamentation,  not  so  much  for  themselves  as  for  their 
effect. — But  some^  teach  that  those  heretics  who  have  been  or- 
dained in  the  Church,  have  the  power  of  ordaining  and  conse- 
crating, even  when  they  are  separated  from  it;  but  persons  in 
schism  or  heresy  who  are  ordained  and  anointed  by  them  are  with- 
out this  power,  and  therefore  when  they  wish  to  ordain,  they 
rather  inflict  a  wound  than  confer  grace. 

II.  Of  simony,  why  it  is  so  called,  and  zvhat  it  is. 

And  we  must  not  doubt  that  simonists  are  heretics,  though  be- 
fore the  sentence  of  degradation  they  both  ordain  and  consecrate. 
And  although  they  are  properly  called  simonists  who,  like  Simon 
Magus,2  wish  to  buy  priceless  grace  for  a  price,  and  they  who 
accept  a  price  for  their  sacred  ministry  like  Giezi,^  should  be 
called  Giezites;  yet  all,  both  those  who  give  and  those  who  accept 
are  called  simonists,  and  both  are  condemned  by  the  same  sentence. 

III.  Of   those   who   are   ordained   by   simonists   with    their   own 

knowledge,  and  zvho  are  not. 

However  there  is  a  difference  between  persons  who  are  know- 
ingly ordained  by  simonists,  and  those  who  are  ordained  in  igno- 


1  Cf.  Gratian,  on  C.  Per  iUiciiam  (3.),  C.  9.  q.  I. 

«  Acts  8,  18. 

3 IV.  Kings  (II.  Ki.),  5,  25  ff. 


ranee.  "For  persons  who  suffered  themselves  to  be  consecrated  or 
rather  execrated,  knowingly  by  simonists  have  a  consecration  entirely 
invalid.  But  the  ordination  of  persons  who  were  ordained  by  simon- 
ists whom  they  did  not  know  to  be  simonists  when  they  were  or- 
dained by  them,  and  whom  they  then  supposed  to  be  Catholics,  is 
confirmed  out  of  mercy."  ^ 

IV.  Of  those  persons  who  say  that  they  buy  corporeal  things,  not 

spiritual, 

"But  if  some  object  that  they  are  not  buying  consecrations,  but 
only  the  things  which  follow  from  consecration;  they  prove  them- 
selves altogether  foolish.  For  whoever  sells  one  thing,  without 
which  the  other  cannot  be  had,  fails  to  sell  either."  2 

V.  Of  the  divisions  of  the  simonists. 

Now  the  divisions  of  simoniacal  heresy  are  three-fold.  For 
some  persons  are  ordained  simoniacally  by  simonists;  others  simo- 
niacally  by  men  who  are  not  simonists,  others  not  simoniacally  by 
simonists.  Wherefore  Pope  Nicholas^ :  "We  have  established  the 
decree  concerning  the  three-fold  heresy  of  simony  that  is,  concerning 
those  simonists  who  ordain  or  are  ordained  simoniacally  and  con- 
cerning simonists  simoniacally  ordained  by  persons  not  simonists, 
and  concerning  simonists  ordained  by  simonists  but  not  simoniacally. 
Simonists  simoniacally  ordained  or  ordaining,  shall  be  deposed  from 
their  own  rank,  according  to  the  canons.  Also  simonists  simoniacally 
ordained  by  persons  not  simonists,  shall  be  similarly  removed  from 
office.  But  simonists  not  simoniacally  ordained  by  simonists  we 
mercifully  permit  to  remain  in  office  with  the  laying-on  of  hands,  on 
account  of  the  necessity  of  the  season."  "This  must  be  understood 
of  persons  ordained  by  simonists,  when  ignorant  that  they  are  simon- 
ists. Not  the  guilt  of  the  offence  makes  them  simonists,  but  the 
ordination  by  a  simonist." 


^  Can.  Si  qui  a  simoniacis  (108.),  C.  i.  q.  i. 
*  Can.  Si  quis  obiecerit  (7.),  C.  i.  q.  3. 
3  Can.  Statuitnus  decretum  (107.),  C.  I.  q.  I. 
Gratian  on  this  canon. 


Following  passage,  ibid,  and 


/  \ 


242 


APPENDIX 


VI.     Of  persons  who  are  forcibly  ordained  by  simonists  or  by  her- 
etics. 

We  must  understand  in  the  same  way  the  judgment  of  Pope 
Alexander,!  that  "Simonists  must  be  entirely  condemned  and  de- 
posed: unless  the  man  was  forcibly  compelled  to  it.  For  of  such 
persons,  and  also  of  persons  forcibly  ordained  by  heretics,  Innocent 
says  that  they  can  have  some  color  of  excuse,  if  they  leave  imme- 
diately, and  renounce  the  accursed  place  of  assembly." 

As  for  the  age  of  persons  to  be  ordained  Pope  Nicholas  has 
decreed2:  'The  holy  canons,  he  says,  have  established  that  a  sub- 
deacon  should  not  be  ordained  before  he  is  fourteen  years  of  age,  nor 
a  deacon  before  twenty-five,  nor  a  priest  before  thirty.  Then,  if  the 
man  is  worthy,  he  can  be  elected  to  the  episcopate" ;  this  rule  we  also 
command  to  be  observed  in  like  manner.  Also  Fabian:  "If  a  man 
has  not  completed  thirty  years  of  age,  he  shall  not  be  ordained  priest, 
even  if  he  is  entirely  worthy";  "because  the  Lord  himself  was 
baptized  at  thirty  years  of  age,  and  then  began  to  teach." 

»  Gathered  from  C.  Erga  simoniacos  (i lo.),  ibid,  and  C.  Constat  multos  (i  1 1.), 
ibid.,  and  Gratian,  ibid. 

«  Can.  In  singulis  gradibus  (2.).  d.  77;  Hugh.  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  III.  c.  21. 
Following  passage  is  C.  Si  quis  triginta  (i.),  d.  78.  The  last  words  are  in  C. 
Presbyter  (4.),  ibid.;  see  Luke  3,  21  ff. 

A  new  rule  for  the  age  of  candidates  for  ordination  was  passed  by  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent  (Sess.  XXIII.  de  Reform.).— Twenty-two  is  the  age  for  sub-deacons, 
twenty-three  for  deacons,  and  twenty-five  for  priests. 


\f 


i        ^ 


Distinction  XXVI 

I.  Of  the  sacrament  of  marriage, 

"Although  the  other  sacraments  took  their  rise  after  sin  and  on 
account  of  sin,  we  read  that  the  sacrament  of  marriage  was  insti- 
tuted by  the  Lord  even  before  sin,  yet  not  as  a  remedy,  but  as  a 
duty."  1  For  the  Scripture  relates  in  Genesis  that  a  sleep  was  sent 
upon  Adam  and  one  of  his  ribs  was  taken,  and  from  it  a  woman 
formed,  and  that  the  man  understanding  in  spirit  for  what  purpose 
the  woman  was  made,  said  prophetically  after  his  trance:  "This  is 
now  bone  of  my  bones  and  flesh  of  my  flesh ;  for  this  reason  shall  a 
man  leave  his  father  and  his  mother,  and  shall  cleave  unto  his  wife, 
and  they  shall  be  two  in  one  flesh." 

II.  Of  its  institution  and  purpose. 

Now  the  institution  of  marriage  is  two- fold :  one  was  instituted 
before  sin  in  paradise  as  a  duty,  that  there  might  be  a  blameless 
couch  and  honorable  nuptials^;  as  a  result  of  which  they  might  con- 
ceive without  passion  and  bring  forth  without  pain;  the  other  was 
instituted  after  sin  outside  paradise  for  a  remedy,  to  prevent  unlaw- 
ful desires;  the  first,  that  nature  might  be  muhiplied;  the  second, 
that  nature  might  be  protected,  and  sin  repressed.  For  even  before 
sin  God  said:  "Increase  and  multiply"  3 ;  and  again  after  sin,  when 
most  men  had  been  destroyed  by  the  Deluge.*  But  Augustine  testi- 
fies^  that  before  sin  marriage  was  instituted  for  a  duty,  and  after 
sin  allowed  for  a  remedy,  when  he  says :  "What  is  a  duty  for  the 
sound  is  a  remedy  for  the  sick."  For  the  infirmity  of  incontinence 
which  exists  in  the  flesh  that  is  dead  through  sin,  is  protected  by 
honorable  marriage  lest  it  fall  into  the  ruin  of  vice.  If  the  first  men 
had  not  sinned,  they  and  their  descendants  would  have  united  with- 

»  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  II.  de  Sacram.  p.  XI.  c.  i ;  from  the  same  what  follows 
is  also  taken.    See  Gen.  2,  21.  23.  24. 

*  Heb.  13,  4.    Gratian  on  C.  Sicut  non  omnis  (2.),  C.  32.  q.  2. 
*Gen.  I,  28. 

*  Gen.  9,  I. 

» Super  Gen.  ad  lit.  lib.  IX.  c.  7.  n.*  12.    At  the  end  of  the  chapter  see  Rom. 
7»  15.  23. 

243 


244 


APPENDIX 


DISTINCTION  XXVI 


245 


out  the  incentive  of  the  flesh  and  the  heat  of  passion ;  and  as  any 
good  deed  deserves  reward,  so  their  union  would  have  been  good 
and  worthy  of  reward.  But  because  on  account  of  sin  the  law  of 
deadly  concupiscence  has  beset  our  members,  without  which  there 
is  no  carnal  union,  an  evil  union  is  reprehensible  unless  it  be  ex- 
cused by  the  blessings  of  marriage. 

TIL     When  marriage  was  contracted  by  command  and  when  by 
permission. 

The  first  institution  was  commanded,  the  second  permitted. 
For  we  learn  from  the  Apostle,^  that  marriage  was  permitted  to  the 
human  race  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  fornication.  But  this 
permission,  because  it  does  not  select  better  things,  is  a  remedy,  not 
a  reward;  if  anyone  rejects  it,  he  will  deserve  judgment  of  death. 
An  act  which  is  allowed  by  permission  is  voluntary,  not  necessary; 
otherwise  the  one  who  did  not  do  it  would  be  a  transgressor.  And 
we  can  rightly  understand  that  it  was  said  to  the  first  men  as  a  com- 
mand before  sin:  "Increase  and  multiply";  and  they  were  bound  by 
the  command  even  after  sin,  until  the  multiplication  was  achieved, 
after  which  marriage  was  contracted  by  permission.  So  after  the 
deluge  when  nearly  the  whole  human  race  was  wiped  out,  the  sons 
of  Noah  were  commanded :  "Increase  and  multiply" ;  but  when  man 
had  multiplied,  marriage  was  contracted  by  permission,  not  by  com- 
mand. 

IV.  In  what  ways  the  permission  should  be  received. 

Now  permission  is  received  in  various  ways,  as  concession,  as 
remission,  as  toleration.  And  there  is  toleration  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, for  lesser  good  deeds  and  lesser  evils ;  among  the  lesser  good 
deeds  is  marriage,  which  does  not  deserve  a  palm,  but  is  a  remedy ; 
among  the  lesser  evils,  that  is,  the  venial  ones,  is  a  union  which  is 
due  to  incontinency.  For  such  a  marriage  is  permitted,  that  is,  is 
allowed ;  and  such  a  marriage,  that  is  such  a  union,  is  tolerated,  that 
is  suffered,  in  so  far  as  it  is  not  forbidden. 

V.  That  marriage  is  good. 

Now  there  have  been  some  heretics  who  denounced  marriage, 


( 


r 


I 


I 


T 


who  were  called  Tatians.^  "These  condemn  marriage  altogether^ 
and  make  it  equal  to  fornication  and  other  corruptions,  and  they 
do  not  receive  into  their  number  any  male  or  female  living  in  mar- 
riage." "But  that  marriage  is  good^  is  proved  not  only  by  the  fact 
that  we  read  that  the  Lord  instituted  marriage  between  our  first 
parents,  but  also  that  Christ  was  present  at  a  marriage  in  Cana  of 
Galilee  and  commended  it  by  a  miracle,  changing  the  water  into 
wine;  and  that  afterwards  he  forbade  a  man  to  put  away  his  wife, 
save  for  the  cause  of  fornication.  The  Apostle  also  says:  'A 
virgin  does  not  sin  if  she  marries.'  It  is  therefore  clear  that  marriage 
is  a  good  thing,"  otherwise  it  would  not  be  a  sacrament ;  for  a  sacra- 
ment is  a  sacred  sign. 

VI.     Of  what  thing  marriage  is  a  sacrament. 

Since  therefore  marriage  is  a  sacrament,  it  is  also  a  sacred  sign 
and  of  a  sacred  thing,  namely,  of  the  union  of  Christ  and  the  Church, 
as  the  Apostle  says* :  It  is  written,  he  says :  "A  man  shall  leave 
father  and  mother  and  shall  cleave  to  his  wife,  and  they  shall  be  two 
in  one  flesh.  This  is  a  great  sacrament,  but  I  speak  of  Christ  and 
of  the  Church."  For  as  between  husband  and  wife  there  is  union  in 
the  harmony  of  their  spirits  and  in  the  joining  of  their  bodies,  so  the 
Church  is  joined  to  Christ  by  will  and  nature  in  that  she  wills 
the  same  as  he,  and  that  he  himself  assumed  the  form  of  the  nature 
of  man.  Therefore  the  bride  is  united  to  the  bridegroom  spiritually 
and  physically,  that  is  by  love  and  by  a  conformity  to  nature.  And 
the  symbol  of  both  these  unions  is  in  marriage ;  for  the  harmony  of 
the  husband  and  wife  signifies  the  spiritual  union  of  Christ  and  the 
Church  which  takes  place  through  love ;  and  the  union  of  the  sexes 
signifies  the  union  which  takes  place  through  a  conformity  to  nature. 

Hence  it  is  that  some  doctors  have  said  that  a  woman  does  not 
belong  in  marriage  who  does  not  know  union  in  the  flesh.  For 
Augustine  says^ :  "There  is  no  doubt  that  a  woman  does  not  belong 


*  I.  Cor.  7,  6. 


*  August.,  de  Haeresihus,  c.  25. 
« Ibid. 

*  Sum.  Sent.  tr.  7.  c.  2.    See  Gen.  2,  24,  and  John  2,  2  ff.,  then  Matt.  5,  32; 
19,  9;  and  finally  I.  Cor.  7,  36. 

<  Eph.  5,  31.  32. 

*  Not  found  in  Augustine;  Gratian,  C.  Non  est  duhium  (16.);  and  also  it  is 
the  continuation  of  the  second  passage,  (that  from  Pope  Leo). 


246 


APPENDIX 


J^ 


1/ 


Lli 
If 


in  marriage,  in  whose  case  it  is  shown  that  there  has  been  no  sexual 
union."  Also  Pope  Leo'  :  "Since  the  bond  of  marriage  was  so  insti- 
tuted from  the  beginning  that  without  sexual  union  it  does  not  con- 
tain the  sacrament  of  Christ  and  the  Church ;  there  is  not  doubt  that 
a  woman  does  not  belong  in  marriage  in  whose  case  it  is  shown  that 
there  has  been  no  mystery  of  marriage."  Also  Augustine^:  **Mar- 
riage  is  not  complete  without  sexual  union." — If  one  accepts  this 
according  to  the  superficial  meaning  of  the  words,  he  is  led  into 
such  error  as  to  say  that  without  carnal  union,  matrimony  cannot  be 
contracted,  and  that  there  was  no  marriage  between  Mary  and 
Joseph,  or  that  it  was  not  perfect;  to  think  which  is  a  sin.  For  it 
was  the  more  holy  and  perfect,  as  it  was  the  more  free  from  carnal 
acts.  But  the  passages  above  are  to  be  understood  in  this  way,  not 
that  a  woman  does  not  belong  in  marriage,  in  whose  case  there  is  no 
sexual  union ;  but  that  she  does  not  belong  in  a  marriage  which  con- 
tains the  express  and  full  symbol  of  the  union  of  Christ  and  the 
Church.  For  her  marriage  represents  the  union  of  Christ  and  the 
Church,  which  is  in  love,  but  not  that  which  is  in  a  conformity  to 
nature.  There  is  therefore  in  her  marriage  a  type  of  the  union  of 
Christ  and  the  Church,  but  only  of  that  union  in  which  the  Church 
is  united  to  Christ  by  love,  not  of  that  in  which  through  Christ's 
assumption  of  the  flesh  the  members  are  joined  to  the  head ;  but  her 
marriage  is  not  for  that  reason  less  holy,  because  as  Augustine 
says,3  "in  marriage  the  sanctity  of  the  sacrament  is  more  important 
than  the  fruitfulness  of  the  womb."  Marriage  is  also  a  sign  of  the 
spiritual  union  and  affection  of  souls,  by  which  husbands  and  wives 
ought  to  be  united.  Wherefore  the  Apostle  says* :  "Husbands,  love 
your  wives  as  your  own  bodies." 


*  Ep.  167.  (alias  2.)  ad  Rustic,  inquisit.  4;  Gratian,  C.  Cum  societas,  C.  27. 
q.  2.  and  on  C.  Sufficiat  (2.),  ibid. 

*  I.  Soliloq.  c.  10.  n.  17. 

■  De  Bono  coniugal.  c.  18.  n.  21. 

*  Eph.  5,  25. 


^ 


I 


i 


^) 


'  r 


1! 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

In  addition  to  the  works  mentioned  below,  articles  of  import- 
ance may  be  found  in  some  of  the  recent  encyclopaedias,  in  many 
cases  written  by  specialists,  and  in  some  by  scholars  of  the  very 
first  rank.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  the  article  Sacraments, 
(D.  J.  Kennedy)  in  the  Catholic  Encyclopaedia;  the  article  Euchar- 
ist in  the  Middle  Ages  (J.  H.  Srawley)  in  the  Encyclopaedia  of 
Religion  and  Ethics;  and  Sakrament  (F.  Kattenbusch)  in  the  Realen- 
cyklopadie  f  iir  protestantische  Theologie  und  Kirche. 

Baltzer,  Otto.  Die  Sentenzen  des  Petrus  Lombardus.  Ihre 
Quellen  und  ihre  dogmengeschichtliche  Bedeutung.  Studien  zur 
Geschichte  der  Theologie  und  der  Kirche.  8  Bd.  Heft  3.  Leipzig. 
1902.    viii,  164  pp. 

The  most  complete  and  exhaustive  discussion  of  the  sources. 

Bouuaert,  P.  Claeys,  S.  J.  La  Sunima  Sententiarum,  appartient- 
elle  a  Hugues  de  Saint- Victor  ?  Revue  d'histoire  ecclesiastique.  X. 
1909.    Pp.  278-279,  710-719. 

Chefdebien,  Roch  de.  Une  attribution  contestee:  La  **Summa 
Sententiarum"  de  Hugues  de  Saint- Victor.  Revue  Augustinienne. 
XII.     1908.     Paris.     Pp.  529-560. 

This  and  the  above  are  two  important  contributions  to  the  contro- 
versy over  the  authorship  of  the  "Summa  Sententiarum." 

Conybeare,  Frederick  Cornwallis.  Myth,  Magic  and  Morals ;  a 
Study  of  Christian  origins.    London.     1909.    xviii,  376  pp. 

Denifle,  P.  Heinrich,  O.  P.  Die  Sentengen  Abaelards  und  die 
Bearbeitungen  seiner  Theologia  vor  Mitte  des  12.  Jhs.  Archiv  fiir 
Litteratur-  und  Kirchengeschichte  des  Mittelalters.  I.  1885.  Berlin. 
Pp.  402-469,  584-624. 

Denifle,  P.  Heinrich,  O.  P.  Die  Sentenzen  Hugos  von  St.  Victor. 
Archiv  fiir  Litteratur-  und  Kirchengeschichte  des  Mittelalters.  III. 
1887.    Berlin.    Pp.  634-640. 

Foumier,  Paul.    Deux  controverses  sur  les  origines  du  decret 

de  Gratien.    Revue  d'histoire  et  de  litterature  religieuses.    III.    1898. 

Paris.    Pp.  97-116,  253-280. 

Very  important  for  the  discussion  of  the  dates  of  Gratian's  and  the 
Lombard's  books. 

247 


li 


248 


APPENDIX 


Ghellinck,  J.  de,  S.  J.  A  propos  de  quelques  affirmations  dir 
nombre  septenaire  des  sacraments  au  XI  le  siecle.  Recherches  de 
science  religieuse.    I.    Paris.    1910.    Pp.  493-497. 

Showing  that  the  Lombard  was  not  the  first  to  give  the  number 
of  the  sacraments  as  seven. 

Ghellinck,  J.  de,  S.  J.  Le  mouvement  theologique  du  Xlle 
siecle,  etudes,  recherches  et  documents,  fitudes  d'histoire  des 
dogmes  et  d'ancienne  litterature  ecclesiastique.  Paris.  19 14.  ix, 
409  pp. 

The  most  important  book  for  the  Lombard's  period. 

Ghellinck,  J.  de,  S.  J.  Le  Traite  de  Pierre  Lombard  sur  les 
sept  ordres  ecclesiastiques :  ses  sources,  ses  copistes.  Revue  d'his- 
toire  ecclesiastique.  X.  1909.  Pp.  290-302,  720-728;  XI.  1910. 
Pp.  29-46. 

Ghellinck,  J.  de,  S.  J.  Mediaeval  Theology :  a  few  notes  on  its 
early  history.  The  American  Catholic  Quarterly  Review.  XXXIII. 
Jan.  to  Oct.  1908.     Philadelphia.     Pp.  534-564. 

Ghellinck,  J.  de,  S.  J.  The  Liber  Sententiarum.  The  Dublin 
Review.    CXLVI.    Jan.  and  April,  1910.    London.    Pp.  139-166. 

The  best  summary  of  the  subject.     Most  of  this  is  reprinted  in  "Le 
mouvement  theologique"  cited  above. 

Gietl,  P.  Fr.  Ambrosius  M.,  O.  Pr.  Die  Sentenzen  Rolands 
nachmals  Papstes  Alexander  III.    Freiburg  in  Breisgau.    1891. 

Goetz,  K.  G.  Die  heutige  Abendmahlsfrage  in  ihrer  geschicht- 
lichen  Entwicklung.    Leipzig.     1907.    viii,  311  pp. 

An  excellent  summary  of  the  entire  Eucharistic  controversy. 

Gore,  Charles.  Dissertations  on  Subjects  connected  with  the 
Incarnation.    New  York. 

Hagenbach,  K.  R.    History  of  Doctrines.    2  vols.    1869. 

Valuable,    if    somewhat    antiquated,    owing    to    citations    from    the 


sources. 


Hahn,  G.  L.  Die  Lehre  von  den  Sakramenten  in  ihrer  ge- 
schichtlichen  Entwickelung  innerhalb  der  abendlandischen  Kirche 
bis  zum  Concil  von  Trient.    Breslau.    1864.    viii,  447  pp. 

Harnack,  Adolph.  History  of  Dogma,  (translated  from  third 
German  edition  by  Neil  Buchanan.)     Boston.    1897.    7  vols. 

Hatch.  Edwin.    The  Influence  of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages  upon 


f 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


249 


il 


t 


H 


f 


A 


the  Christian  Church,  (edited  by  A.  M.  Fairbairn).     London  and 
Edinburgh.     1890.    xxiii,  359  pp. 

Epoch-making  in  its  day.     Suggestive  but  superseded. 

Lea,  Henry  Charles.  A  History  of  Auricular  Confession  and 
Indulgences  in  the  Latin  Church.    Philadelphia.    1896.    3  vols. 

Of  value  in  this  field  for  its  survey  of  the  sources  through  the  early 
Middle  Ages.     Some  conclusions  open  to  controversy. 

Lightfoot,  J.  B.  The  Apostolic  Fathers.  London  and  New 
York.    1890.     (2d  edition).    Vol.  I.    xii,  496  pp. 

McCabe,  Joseph.  St.  Augustine  and  his  age.  London.  1903. 
vii,  516  pp. 

McCabe,  Joseph.    Peter  Abelard.    New  York,  1901.    vii,  402  pp. 

Mignon,  A.  Les  Origines  de  la  Scholastique  et  Hugues  de 
Saint-Victor.     Paris.     1895.     2  vols. 

Miiller,  Karl.  Der  Umschwung  in  der  Lehre  von  der  Busse 
wahrend  des  12  ten  Jahrhunderts.  Theologische  Abhandlungen. 
Freiburg  in  Breisgau.     1892.     Pp.  287-320. 

O'Brien,  Rev.  John.  A  History  of  the  Mass  and  its  Ceremonies 
in  the  Eastern  and  Western  Church.  (14th  edition,  revised.)  New 
York.     1893.    xxiii,  414  pp. 

Poole,  Reginald  Lane.  Illustrations  of  the  History  of  Mediaeval 
Thought  in  the  Departments  of  Theology  and  Ecclesiastical  PoHtics. 
London,  1884.     viii,  376  pp. 

Good  on  John  Scotus  Erigena. 

Protois,  F.  Pierre  Lombard,  fiveque  de  Paris,  dit  le  Maitre  des 
Sentences ;  son  epoque,  sa  vie,  ses  ecrits,  son  influence.  Paris.  1881. 
198  pp. 

The  most  complete  account  of  Peter  Lombard's  life,  and  a  discus- 
sion of  the  legends  concerning  it. 

Poukens,  J.  B.  Sacramentum  dans  les  oeuvres  de  Saint  Cyprien. 
fitude  lexicographique.  Bulletin  d'ancienne  litterature  et  d'archeo- 
logie  chretiennes.    Oct.  19 12. 

Reville,  Albert.  Du  sens  du  mot  sacramentum  dans  TertuUien. 
ficole  pratique  des  hautes  etudes — Section  des  Sciences  religieuses. 
fitudes  de  critique  et  d'histoire.    Paris.     1889.    I.    Pp.  195-204. 

The  two  articles  named  above  give  an  exhaustive  treatment  of  the 
early  theological  use  of  the  term  sacramentum. 


}  ^ 


250 


APPENDIX 


Schanz,  P.  von.  Der  Begriff  des  Sakramentes  bei  den  Vatem. 
Theologische  Quartalschrift.    Tubingen.     1891.     Pp.  529-576. 

Schanz,  P.  von.  Die  Kirche  und  die  Sakramente.  Theolo- 
gische Quartalschrift.    Tubingen.     1891.    Pp.  3-67. 

Schmoll,  P.  Polykarp,  O.  F.  M.  Die  Busslehre  der  Friih- 
scholastik.  Fine  dogmengeschichtliche  Untersuchung.  Miinchen, 
1909.    xvi,  163  pp. 

Seeberg,  Reinhold.  Text-book  of  the  History  of  Doctrines. 
Revised,  1904,  by  the  author.  Translated  by  Charles  E.  Hay. 
Philadelphia.    1905.    2  vols. 

Sodem,  Hans  von.  Mvarijpiov  und  sacramentum  in  den  ersten 
zwei  Jahrhunderten  der  Kirche.  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  neutestament- 
liche  Wissenschaft.    XH.    191 1.    Giessen.    Pp.  189-226. 

Sohm,  Rudolph.  Kirchenrecht.  Systematisches  Handbuch  der 
deutschen  Rechtswissenschaft.  8te  Abtheilung,  erster  Band.  Leip- 
zig.    1892.    xxiii,  700  pp. 

Emphasizes  the  sacramental  basis  of  the  ecclesiastical  structure. 


VITA 

Elizabeth  Frances  Rogers,  born  June  29,  1892,  in  Philadel- 
phia, Pa.  Graduated,  Public  High  School,  Madison,  New  Jersey, 
1907.  B.A.,  Goucher  College,  1912.  M.A.,  Columbia  University, 
19 1 3.  Studiosus  philosophiae,  University  of  Bern,  Switzerland, 
191 3- 1 914.    Ph.D.  candidate,  Columbia  University,  19 14- 19 16. 


A 


i 


^ 


.1) 


♦ 


;jg' 


t 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


'    II  I 


II  iiilliiil  i||iii:|  i  1:1 , III! ! 


0032029012 


*iiiiii". 


"\, 


■k 


' 


■'m 


7 

r:  >' 


p  I 


p 

i               A.,. 

i-     1  - 

c 

4'-  a 

c 

'"'* 

-p 

• 

A 

r- 

(/ 

a^ 

v> 

»  *1 


« ?>.-«s 


^ 


^mm'"' 


thJl,  ^1  ajiijSKffij 

jj.  ( *t 

1 

1  ;;.  1 

1 

^Rt " 

1 

B.    n 

it: 

i    -.14. 

!('     .S< 

1 

1 

I,     u 

1.    . , 

.,?..'<' i»l 


) 


o 


w.,aaM5t*:!..:'Li: 


